From: "Jerry Tyner" Subject: RE: [AML] Millennial Economics Date: 31 Jul 2002 15:30:27 -0700 "Richard R. Hopkins" wrote: >> 6. The law of tithing was given to the Church to replace the United = Order. >> There is some scriptural indication that a tithe (10%) represents the >> average amount that we would give back to the community (the excess = over our >> needs) if we were in the United Order. D. Michael Martindale wrote: >The law of tithing has been an eternal principle from the beginning. = The >United Order was an economic experiment Brigham Young performed, and in >each city it looked different. The experiment also failed. Tithing, in >fact, was still paid during the time of the United Order, but it was >paid by the various orders. I agree with D. Michael here. The United Order was not meant to replace = the Law of Tithing. But I want to add a part here. My feeling is the Law = of Tithing is a lesser law just like the 10 Commandments is the lesser = law as compared to what the Savior brought to the World when He = fulfilled the Law. What will replace the Law of Tithing is the Law of = Consecration. This (The law of Consecration) is not nor ever will be the = United Order! How this will happen and where will it start I do not want = to speculate. I'm not at the level yet to be able to be told or even = care right now. Can I live that Law? I believe I can and many others = will be able to as well. My guess is it will hit some people in a very = funny way because they will have preconceived notions of how it will = work and will not even be close. When my wife and I were struggling back = in the early to mid-1990s we swore if the Law of Consecration came then = we would have no problems living it because our debts would be washed = away because we were so poor. I don't think that will be part of the = plan but I still have no problem visualizing myself living this "Higher = Law". Just as an ending part - Everything we have and are living today is = prepatory for what is to come. What are we doing every day to prepare = for that day when the preparation is ended and the Higher Law is given? = Will we be like the Jews in Christ's time or the Nephites (at least for = a couple of hundred years after Christ's visit anyway)? I would hope and = pray I would receive those coming revelations with just as much wonder = and awe as I have those which were given over the most recent previous = 30 years of my life. Jerry Tyner Orange County, CA -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Nan McCulloch" Subject: [AML] Recycling Songs (was: Choose the Rock) Date: 31 Jul 2002 20:53:36 -0600 Since I have been thinking about writing a piece about my life and = including songs that were important to me, I was interested in an Aug. = 5, '02 Time article _They Will Rock You_ written by Richard Zoglin. = Zoglin cited Paul Simon's struggle to write new music for his musical = _The Capeman_, "only to see it bomb with the critics and at the box = office." Then Abba let other artists take their hit songs, "graft them = onto a flimsy story about a girl looking for her real dad on her wedding = day and turned _Mamma Mia!_ into a smash hit on Broadway--and just about = everywhere else in the Western world." Apparently theater goers have = "fallen in love with rock--so long as it's retro." Other successful = examples are given. Years ago many of us did this with Roadshows--we = grafted appropriated songs onto our otherwise flimsy stories with great = results. There was also an excellent show on PBS where this idea was = successfully used. I believe the name of the show was _Pennies >From Heaven_. Have any of you playwrights used this idea successfully?=20 Nan McCulloch -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 31 Jul 2002 22:17:39 -0600 > But I also recognize that postmodernism has some serious weaknesses that > make it harmfully non-LDS as well--like the absence of even potential > absolutes or standards. You do not refer, of course, to Joseph's words to Nancy Rigdon in his attempt to get her to accept his proposal for plural marriage (paraphrased): "What is wrong under one situation can be, and often is, right under another situation." What is less absolutist than that, a saying that suggests that marrying a married man may under certain conditions be wrong but may be correct if God commands it? Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 01 Aug 2002 11:51:51 -0700 Tony Keep the faith! I'm from the "MISSION FIELD" also. I now live in Utah. My oldest daughter studied classical guitar under a master, who had studied under Segovia. The first two pieces she learned to play were "The Day The Music Died" and "Mr. Bo Jangles." She went on to learn many of the more traditional classical pieces, and she even won some awards and one grand Championship in the annual California armature music festival. She had been used to being asked to play for Mutual, Sunday School Relief Society, and occasionally Sacrament meetings. While we were living in the very last ward we lived in before she got married and left home, the ward music director asked her to perform in a Sacrament meeting in which a friend of my daughter was having his missionary farewell. She accepted. Then the Bishop who had been born and raised in Utah and had a very musical family, singers, pianists, and organists, called and told my daughter she could not play her guitar in the chapel. She was crushed, but she got over it, and so did we. We're all still active, the gospel is true. I think these kinds of biases need to be explored in our writing and some basis or significance needs to be attached, so that there is a better understanding of what is doctrine and what is ingrained personal dogma. It's kind of like the withholding of recommends for facial hair, or for drinking Coca-Cola or Pepsi. Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eileen Stringer" Subject: Re: [AML] Harry Potter Question Date: 01 Aug 2002 12:52:43 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- >I suspect Ms. Rowling either knew a smattering of Latin, knew enough about >English origins to be aware of Latin roots, and/or had a Latin dictionary to >hand when she made up the words for these spells. (She was a teacher, >apparently, so this should be no huge surprise.) But they have absolutely >nothing to do with runes or with Wicca. Ms. Rowling was educated at Exeter College and did have a basic classical education. Eileen Stringer -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 01 Aug 2002 13:20:38 -0600 ___ Jacob ___ | And since postmodernism is the tool they are using to | formulate their evaluations, postmodernism is, not | surprisingly, itself under attack. Since postmodernism | cannot be used adequately against itself and lends | itself better to liberal than conservative arguments, | it leaves conservatives who wish to pursue the liberal | arts with a frustrating dilemma--compromise their | integrity or find other work. ___ As I mentioned, postmodernism *has* been used against a lot of what Americans would call liberalism. Christopher Norris has written a lot on what happened to Marxism and what happened to Freudianism is well known. Now there are now new versions of those movements, but they have been radically changed in important ways by postmodern attacks. Further postmodernism has brought Christianity and God back into academic thought which, from an American point of view, is a clear move *away* from liberalism. (I keep saying American because the terms conservative and liberal aren't always that helpful. For instance libertarianism, which most Americans would call conservative, is actually classic liberalism. But I digress.) If I'd make a point, it is that postmodernism is neither conservative nor liberal. Now it is the case that many in academics are liberal. But that was true before the rise of postmodernism in America during the 80's and early 90's. It's just that postmodernism is the latest "fad" in the social sciences and humanities. To suggest, however, that postmodernism "lends itself better to liberal than conservative arguments" doesn't seem right. For instance postmodernism probably provides a stronger set of arguments against "PC Speech" than most arguments conservatives were making. (i.e. the arbitrariness of the sign and the ability to open up to readings of lines of power any sign and not just terms like "history" or even "mailman") Remember that the core of postmodern attack is to use the structures and assumptions of a text against itself. The problem with traditional liberal technique, especially in academia, is that it assumes a kind of priviledged meta-text that conservatives are not permitted to question. (i.e. in environmentalism the "value" of nature, in feminism the supposed reading of male domination, etc.) Because political liberalism (and political conservativism) rests upon priviledged meta-text I think that postmodernism is a very adept method of criticism. Further the "compromise their integrity" seems to suggest that one is compromising ones integrity if one adopts postmodern arguments. Yet it seems to me that the problem isn't postmodernism but that some conservatives wish to attack liberalism in terms of a particular approach to texts. Yet since postmodernism has rendered such attacks difficult the conservatives become frustrated. We see in the Sokal incident when the "conservatives" try to move beyond the "bad scholarship" issue. Of course the Sokal incident also illustrated the problem of making this a conservative vs. liberal issue. Sokal and most of his sympathizers are traditional liberals and *not* conservatives at all. They want a return to the more Marxist like liberalism of the 60's and 70's. ___ Jacob ___ | But I also recognize that postmodernism has some serious | weaknesses that make it harmfully non-LDS as well--like the | absence of even potential absolutes or standards. ___ It's important to realize that postmodernism does *not* make this claim. Social relativism arose in anthropology and became mainstream in the more traditional liberalism of the 50's, 60's and 70's. Probably the best known example of this was Margaret Mead whose critique of marriage and sexual mores in America is what most religious people mean when they attack relativism. I'd add that poststructuralism which critiques the underlying approach of anthropology does undermine such relativism by representing in western thought the notion of the transcendent. For instance the transcendence of the Other, such as found in Levinas' phenomenology, is a return to the absolute. It was a return to the absolute that liberalism's ground of "man is the measure of all things" was doomed to lose once it set upon that direction during the Renaissance. One could well argue that Nietzsche's cry of "God is dead" was a recognition of how liberalism's loss of transcendence entailed relativism and (to Nietzsche) nihilism. In a very real way postmodernism is the latest attempt to avoid this nihilism inherent in many forms of liberalism (whether they appear in political liberalism or political conservativism). The way in which this is done varies. It can be a return to a kind of religious transendence, as found in French postmodernism or it can be a return to a kind of pragmatism ala William James as we find in Richard Rorty. ___ Jacob ___ | Particularly when those abuses violate core postmodernist | principles by setting up an unofficial standard based on a | particular political philosophy. ___ Then isn't your criticism really that those claiming to be postmodernists really aren't? That they are traditional liberals who've simply wrapped themselves in the robe of postmodernists? It would seem that the obvious way to attack such movements is by making postmodern arguments. Yet it is that line of thinking which you seem to view as compromising ones integrity. The problem isn't "political postmodernism" but rather the fact that conservatives have basically decided to ignore the debate and decry the rhetoric. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Unsavory Etymologies Date: 01 Aug 2002 14:59:52 -0700 I'm not sure where I heard that reference about the acronym for unlawful carnal knowledge, but I was quite certain it was true, because it sounded so logical. I saw the Van Halen album and thought they were just copying the reference to the English police blotter. After briefly researching this, I haven't come up with a source as yet. I'll work on it a bit more. I know I heard it from a reliable source. Could someone please tell me what in the world, >innocuous beginnings, such as t**t, g*****j***v**m >and sw****7**st. translates to? or at least put in a few strategic vowels so I can decipher it??? I guess I'm not as smart as Barbara Hume's e-mail server. ;-) [MOD: Not to be a party-pooper here, but please make any such replies private to Bill, unless they are AML-List appropriate...] Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Article about Annette Lyon Date: 01 Aug 2002 17:07:29 -0600 Thanks for posting this, Harlow! It's been a fun ride so far. I feel lucky that Sharon Gholdston put me in her column. Annette -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Possible AML-List Oddities Date: 02 Aug 2002 01:14:31 -0500 Folks, I'm experimenting with getting Andrew Hall (our assistant moderator) online to help with moderating duties as needed. From time to time over the next few days, some email messages will be coming from him, rather than from me. There may be some bugs as we try to work it out. Your patience is appreciated. Jonathan Langford AML-List moderator -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Date: 02 Aug 2002 03:02:29 -0600 helo=ungeheuer) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 17aQUf-0003RX-00 for aml-list@lists.xmission.com; Thu, 01 Aug 2002 17:40:38 -0700 Message-ID: <027e01c239bd$feb59370$0100a8c0@ungeheuer> References: <002101c234d8$a91e22e0$39029b97@quark> <007f01c234fa$3aaefc90$6a159d40@MyLaptop> <008f01c23827$75385020$3793fe0c@c1759871b> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list I can't help myself... This past week a nice, middle-aged couple in my ward sent their son off on his mission to Massachussetts. Their son had been a wrestling champion and they compared his hard work in becoming a star wrestler to becoming a star worker in the mission field. When his mother stood up to lead off the talks, she quoted the lyrics to "We Are the Champions" by Queen and used that song to establish a theme that all the other speakers addressed. A wonderful, faithful set of talks and a good missionary farewell. Inspiration is where you find it, and is powerful for each of us as individuals in deeply personal ways. Scott Parkin _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Date: 02 Aug 2002 03:16:11 -0600 g71FtEC37927 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 08:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <200208010857300930.003E11C5@smtp.tns.net> X-Mailer: Calypso Version 3.30.00.00 (3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list Review ====== Title: The Lost Tribe -- Book of Mormon Sleuth 2 Author: C.B. Andersen Publisher: Bookcraft Year Published: 2002 Number of Pages: 259 Binding: Quality Paperback ISBN: 1-57008-842-X Price: $9.95 Reviewed by Jeffrey Needle The much-anticipated second volume in the "Book of Mormon Sleuth" series by C.B. (Carl) Andersen has finally arrived. Some of you will recall my enthusiasm for the first volume in the series, titled simply "Book of Mormon Sleuth." In that volume, we met the Andrews family, a typical Utah Mormon family, engaging in a quest for "buried treasure" -- buried, that is, in a copy of the Book of Mormon owned by an ancestor. In this volume, Andersen takes a different approach, but continues his quest for ways to make studying the Book of Mormon interesting to children. "The Lost Tribe" is told through the eyes of Jeff Andrews, one of the Andrews boys. Their father had won a vacation trip to Alaska, an exciting prospect for the family. When their airplane encounters problems and cannot take off, the passengers are offered alternative flights. But the Andrews family decides to stay on that plane. They, a man named Tom, and a small flight crew, constitute the entire population of the plane. The plane's navigational system fails, and they find themselves making a forced landing somewhere in the Arctic Circle, although they don't as yet know where they are. They encounter a strange "tribe" and find themselves in a very sticky situation, unable to communicate and guilty, it seems, of some transgression they don't yet understand. Turns out this "tribe" is one of the lost tribes of Israel! I won't go into how they figure this all out, not wanting to reveal all the details of the book. Suffice it to say that their adventures are hair-raising. Finding themselves in the midst of a serious tribal dispute, and fortunately discovering a young man who actually speaks a little English (an American they named "Christian" had similarly found his way into the tribal community, and lived among them long enough to teach them some English), the small group -- the Andrews family, Tom, and the flight crew -- must somehow find a way to escape the tribe and find some help. As I read, I wondered how this book would sound to a younger person. The sense of adventure and wonder in the book is, I believe, a great experience for a young LDS reader. Andersen is to be commended for writing a book that doesn't "speak down" to the young people. While the story has all the earmarks of an youthful adventure, it assumes a level of intelligence that, I believe, does the young reader justice. This fellow Tom emerges as one of the central characters in the book. I was gratified to see a non-Mormon playing such a key role in the adventure. In fact, the part of Tom represents something of a departure in Andersen's story-telling technique. Tom is a sympathetic and authentic character. Sadly, in a few places, Andersen fails to produce a believable dialogue between Tom and the Andrews family, between gentile and Saint. This problem is not unique to this book -- Mormon understanding of other religions is often no better than a non-Mormon's understanding of Mormonism. And when conversations are related in Mormon fiction, they often go beyond what is believable. Seeing through the eyes of a non-Mormon is a skill that involves a deep understanding of non-Mormon thought. Let's look at one example. To set it up, the family and Tom are still on the airplane. They've been discussing biblical matters with Tom, and are now talking about ordinances. The unfamiliar names are those of the Andrews children: Dad paused and Aaron began to turn to Jacob again, but turned back once more as Dad added, "Most of these ordinances are performed for both the living and the dead." My attention was caught by Tom's obvious shock over this last statement. "Do you perform baptisms for the dead?" he whispered. "As spoken of in the New Testament?" Dad answered quietly yet firmly. "Yes. We do." He was staring at Jacob as he spoke. "I've never heard of a church that followed all those biblical teachings," Tom replied. (p. 102-103) How likely is it that a non-Mormon would have this view of proxy baptism? How many non-Mormons feel that baptism for the dead is a "biblical teaching"? Fact is, non-Mormons find the practice a bit strange. And let it be said that contemporary Mormon scholars are reluctant to point to the single verse in Paul's first letter to Corinth to justify the practice. Instead, modern revelation is the key support. The discussion would have been more realistic had Dad pointed Tom to the verse in 1 Corinthians and explained how the Church understands that scripture. It was simply not believable that Tom, a non-Mormon, would consider proxy baptism a "biblical teaching." Another problem. Pages 138-139 contain a muddled dialogue about sabbath-keeping. Having lost track of time somewhat, the family can't decide whether it's Saturday or Sunday. They decide that it is indeed Sunday. The tribe is about to observe the sabbath. The question is asked: "...didn't the Israelites celebrate the Sabbath from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday?" "Maybe when Christian taught them about Christ, they changed their Sabbath to Sunday," Dad suggested. Problem is, it has already been established that the tribe at large had rejected the Messiah, were insistent on observance of the law of Moses, including daily animal sacrifices. Given the centrality of the seventh-day Sabbath in the Israelite economy, the idea that they would have yet embraced Sunday as their Sabbath is a bit much. I realize that a young reader will never notice the flaws I found. And, to be frank, they really don't detract from the enjoyment of the book. Nonetheless, Andersen would have benefited from submitting the text of his conversations with non-Mormons to ensure some level of credibility. This is a fine book. It will be enjoyed by young people and adults alike. And, like the first book, it will give parents and teachers new ideas about how to teach the Book of Mormon to young people. Get this book. It's only ten bucks, a real bargain in today's over-priced book market. I believe your young people will enjoy it, and you, too, will find it an enjoyable read. ----------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Derek1966@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 01 Aug 2002 20:42:25 EDT In a message dated 8/1/02 05:20:01 PM, bmdblu2@attbi.com writes: << Then the Bishop who had been born and raised in Utah and had a very musical family, singers, pianists, and organists, called and told my daughter she could not play her guitar in the chapel. She was crushed, but she got over it, and so did we. We're all still active, the gospel is true. >> About 10 years ago at my BYU ward I was surprised to see a girl bring in her guitar to do the musical number in Sacrament meeting. More shocking, when she stood up to sing, the bishop pulled his guitar out from behind his seat (I hadn't seen it earlier) and stood up to play and sing with her. I asked him about this later, said I was so surprised to see that after having heard you couldn't do such a thing. He responded that the most important thing was letting this girl be able participate in the meeting this way. I admired his attitude. Must not have been too wrong, he was later called as stake president (or maybe that was his punishment?). John Perry Provo _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: [AML] C.B. ANDERSEN, _The Lost Tribe_ (Review_ Date: 01 Aug 2002 08:57:30 -0700 [MOD: This went out earlier without a proper subject line. Glitches in the system...] Review ====== Title: The Lost Tribe -- Book of Mormon Sleuth 2 Author: C.B. Andersen Publisher: Bookcraft Year Published: 2002 Number of Pages: 259 Binding: Quality Paperback ISBN: 1-57008-842-X Price: $9.95 Reviewed by Jeffrey Needle The much-anticipated second volume in the "Book of Mormon Sleuth" series by C.B. (Carl) Andersen has finally arrived. Some of you will recall my enthusiasm for the first volume in the series, titled simply "Book of Mormon Sleuth." In that volume, we met the Andrews family, a typical Utah Mormon family, engaging in a quest for "buried treasure" -- buried, that is, in a copy of the Book of Mormon owned by an ancestor. In this volume, Andersen takes a different approach, but continues his quest for ways to make studying the Book of Mormon interesting to children. "The Lost Tribe" is told through the eyes of Jeff Andrews, one of the Andrews boys. Their father had won a vacation trip to Alaska, an exciting prospect for the family. When their airplane encounters problems and cannot take off, the passengers are offered alternative flights. But the Andrews family decides to stay on that plane. They, a man named Tom, and a small flight crew, constitute the entire population of the plane. The plane's navigational system fails, and they find themselves making a forced landing somewhere in the Arctic Circle, although they don't as yet know where they are. They encounter a strange "tribe" and find themselves in a very sticky situation, unable to communicate and guilty, it seems, of some transgression they don't yet understand. Turns out this "tribe" is one of the lost tribes of Israel! I won't go into how they figure this all out, not wanting to reveal all the details of the book. Suffice it to say that their adventures are hair-raising. Finding themselves in the midst of a serious tribal dispute, and fortunately discovering a young man who actually speaks a little English (an American they named "Christian" had similarly found his way into the tribal community, and lived among them long enough to teach them some English), the small group -- the Andrews family, Tom, and the flight crew -- must somehow find a way to escape the tribe and find some help. As I read, I wondered how this book would sound to a younger person. The sense of adventure and wonder in the book is, I believe, a great experience for a young LDS reader. Andersen is to be commended for writing a book that doesn't "speak down" to the young people. While the story has all the earmarks of an youthful adventure, it assumes a level of intelligence that, I believe, does the young reader justice. This fellow Tom emerges as one of the central characters in the book. I was gratified to see a non-Mormon playing such a key role in the adventure. In fact, the part of Tom represents something of a departure in Andersen's story-telling technique. Tom is a sympathetic and authentic character. Sadly, in a few places, Andersen fails to produce a believable dialogue between Tom and the Andrews family, between gentile and Saint. This problem is not unique to this book -- Mormon understanding of other religions is often no better than a non-Mormon's understanding of Mormonism. And when conversations are related in Mormon fiction, they often go beyond what is believable. Seeing through the eyes of a non-Mormon is a skill that involves a deep understanding of non-Mormon thought. Let's look at one example. To set it up, the family and Tom are still on the airplane. They've been discussing biblical matters with Tom, and are now talking about ordinances. The unfamiliar names are those of the Andrews children: Dad paused and Aaron began to turn to Jacob again, but turned back once more as Dad added, "Most of these ordinances are performed for both the living and the dead." My attention was caught by Tom's obvious shock over this last statement. "Do you perform baptisms for the dead?" he whispered. "As spoken of in the New Testament?" Dad answered quietly yet firmly. "Yes. We do." He was staring at Jacob as he spoke. "I've never heard of a church that followed all those biblical teachings," Tom replied. (p. 102-103) How likely is it that a non-Mormon would have this view of proxy baptism? How many non-Mormons feel that baptism for the dead is a "biblical teaching"? Fact is, non-Mormons find the practice a bit strange. And let it be said that contemporary Mormon scholars are reluctant to point to the single verse in Paul's first letter to Corinth to justify the practice. Instead, modern revelation is the key support. The discussion would have been more realistic had Dad pointed Tom to the verse in 1 Corinthians and explained how the Church understands that scripture. It was simply not believable that Tom, a non-Mormon, would consider proxy baptism a "biblical teaching." Another problem. Pages 138-139 contain a muddled dialogue about sabbath-keeping. Having lost track of time somewhat, the family can't decide whether it's Saturday or Sunday. They decide that it is indeed Sunday. The tribe is about to observe the sabbath. The question is asked: "...didn't the Israelites celebrate the Sabbath from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday?" "Maybe when Christian taught them about Christ, they changed their Sabbath to Sunday," Dad suggested. Problem is, it has already been established that the tribe at large had rejected the Messiah, were insistent on observance of the law of Moses, including daily animal sacrifices. Given the centrality of the seventh-day Sabbath in the Israelite economy, the idea that they would have yet embraced Sunday as their Sabbath is a bit much. I realize that a young reader will never notice the flaws I found. And, to be frank, they really don't detract from the enjoyment of the book. Nonetheless, Andersen would have benefited from submitting the text of his conversations with non-Mormons to ensure some level of credibility. This is a fine book. It will be enjoyed by young people and adults alike. And, like the first book, it will give parents and teachers new ideas about how to teach the Book of Mormon to young people. Get this book. It's only ten bucks, a real bargain in today's over-priced book market. I believe your young people will enjoy it, and you, too, will find it an enjoyable read. ----------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 01 Aug 2002 18:46:08 -0600 [MOD: This went out earlier without a proper subject line. Glitches in the system...] I can't help myself... This past week a nice, middle-aged couple in my ward sent their son off on his mission to Massachussetts. Their son had been a wrestling champion and they compared his hard work in becoming a star wrestler to becoming a star worker in the mission field. When his mother stood up to lead off the talks, she quoted the lyrics to "We Are the Champions" by Queen and used that song to establish a theme that all the other speakers addressed. A wonderful, faithful set of talks and a good missionary farewell. Inspiration is where you find it, and is powerful for each of us as individuals in deeply personal ways. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Sharlee Glenn" Subject: [AML] Ron WOODS, _The Hero_ (Review) Date: 01 Aug 2002 18:20:19 -0600 REVIEW Title: _The Hero_ Genre: Young Adult novel Author: Ron Woods Publisher: Alfred A. Knopf Year Published: 2002 Number of Pages: 215 Binding: Hardback ISBN: 0-375-80612-1 Price: $15.95 Reviewed by Sharlee Glenn This was a tough review to write--not because I didn't like the book, but because I COULDN'T KEEP MY HANDS ON THE DARN THING! When the review copy of _The Hero_ first arrived in the mail, my 13-year-old son pounced on it. "Cool, another book about a raft on a river," he said, then disappeared with it into the basement. When I asked him how he'd liked the book several days later, he said: "It was great!" When I asked him where it was, he said: "Uh, I think Patrick's reading it." After Patrick [my 11-year-old] finished it, he passed it to his 9-year-old brother who only got through chapter 2 before my husband spied it on the dresser and hid it in his nightstand so that he could read it in his spare time (which he seemed to find in abundance over the next few days, especially, I might add, when he was *supposed* to be helping me clean out our closet. "Wow, they should make this book into a movie," he once surfaced long enough to say while I glared at him over an armload of DI-bound dress shirts. When I finally laid hold of the book, I had to stash it under a stack of Good Housekeeping magazines whenever I wasn't reading it to keep it from the greedy paws of the remaining males in my family. But, alas, when I sat down to write the review this morning, the book had once again vanished. A thorough interrogation of all possible suspects revealed that my husband was the repeat offender. He had taken the book to church on Sunday to read to his class of deacons and had left it in his briefcase. As you might have gathered, _The Hero_ is a book that appeals to males. "Three boys. Two waterfalls. One raft. And a ride that will change their lives forever" reads the back cover. What testosterone-driven reader wouldn't be excited by that? But _The Hero_ is not just for boys. And it's not just an adventure story. It is a skillfully crafted, thoughtful, and often moving chronicle of a young boy's movement toward maturity. Throughout the course of the novel, 14-year-old Jamie comes to recognize the complex and often puzzling ambiguities of life. In this, _The Hero_ is reminiscent of that other great "raft on a river" novel, _Huckleberry Finn_. The parallels are obvious--the raft, the river, the journey, the themes of prejudice, community, and self-discovery. Ron Woods, an Administrative Assistant to the Dean of the College of Humanities at Brigham Young University, is a very able writer. Although _The Hero_ is his first novel, he handles such elements as dialogue, character development, foreshadowing, and pacing with the ease and confidence of a seasoned craftsman. His language is fresh and lively--and very much in keeping with the tone of the novel: "But the thought of having to deal with Arlie Leeper or his fence--I'd rather shampoo a porcupine," says Jamie at one point. And later, Jamie comments: "Right then, I was sure you could've hid Arlie's brain in a gnat's hind end with room to spare." The setting of _The Hero_ is the small community of Union on the Payette River in Idaho. It is the summer of 1957, and Jamie and his older cousin, Jerry, are busy building a raft. The last thing they want is to have their dweeby neighbor, Dennis, hanging around. But Jamie's parents insist that the boys include Dennis, and they finally consent to let him hold the rope as they take the raft out on the river. What happens next will test the physical, mental, and moral strength of all three boys in ways they could never have imagined. _The Hero_ is an interesting blend of hair-raising suspense and a sort of quiet, philosophical introspection. In the hands of Ron Woods, it's a combination that works. My one complaint about the novel is that the ending seemed contrived to me. Let me explain. I almost got the feeling while reading the book that the story had originally gone one direction and then had later been changed, perhaps at the urging of an editor, and most certainly so that it would seem less manipulative, less moralistic, less predictable. The problem is, the very effort to avoid predictability produced, in my opinion, an ending that seems somewhat forced and not entirely fulfilling. My 13-year-old son's comment was: "I really, really liked the book-- but I wish it would have ended *this* way." I agree. The *other* ending would have been much more satisfying and, I believe, ultimately moving for the book's targeted audience (young readers, particularly, young male readers). But the ending notwithstanding, _The Hero_ is a powerful, finely crafted story. Should you read it? Absolutely. Just keep your hands off my copy! -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 01 Aug 2002 18:49:12 -0600 ___ Thom ___ | "What is wrong under one situation can be, and often is, right | under another situation." What is less absolutist than that, | a saying that suggests that marrying a married man may under | certain conditions be wrong but may be correct if God commands | it? ___ One can make the statement Joseph made and still be an absolutist. Indeed even in traditional ethics that was true. It is wrong to kill, but we make exceptions for self-defense. Absolutism *isn't* the view that what is wrong varies with situation. Rather it is the view that for any particular situation there is *one* correct choice. i.e. that there is a truth about the matter. Even in postmodernism I think that there are many absolutists. They may point out that things are much more complex and interrelated than traditional modernists think. They may feel that the attempts by which modernists "ground" things by argument are impossible. Relativism is what is usually opposed to absolutism. This is the idea that what is right or wrong is *controlled* fully by me. It is a creation of man. As I said it is typically a "boogey-man" in philosophy who has no real adherents. However in the humanities it does have many adherents. I'd once again suggest that this movement arose not out of postmodernism but out of anthropology and that its conquest of English departments preceded the fad of postmodernism by a few decades. In fact relativism is just skepticism believed. I've made all these defenses of postmodernism now - even the political kind. Let me suggest that the real problem is a kind of unrecognized aporia in English departments. They require one to believe a paradox. English departments like to believe that they espouse or at least uncover a kind of truth. Perhaps the way in which they uncover it isn't the same as the sciences or philosophy. But they like to believe that _The Bonfire of the Vanities_, _War and Peace_ or other such texts have truths. Yet when we try and uncover what they mean by this, we quickly run into all sorts of problems. The "truths" are "truths" about the human experience. Yet these "truths" are clearly pluralistic. Further one is required to accept all of these truths simultaneously. Thus a work of fiction written which has a "truth" that contradicts an other work of fiction isn't a problem. Both are equal truths of experience. This maps up quite well with the cultural relativism that became part of anthropology. In opposition to the cultural imperialism of the preceding century, anthropologists came to view each culture's "truths" as valid for that culture. The parallel to "truths" of fiction is obvious. Not only are "truths" about behavior, but even about cosmology and other related things. It is in this context, for instance, that we have serious claims about the phallocentric nature of gravity. (And these feminist critiques occurred well before the rise of postmodern criticism - although one continues to find them expressed with the jargon of PM) Why do I bring this up? Well allow me to return back to the topic of the list: Mormon Letters. This view of relative truth (which is quite independent of PM) is used to deal with scriptures. Thus the Book of Mormon can be fiction but still be "true" in this sense we find in anthropology or Literature. Now the problem English departments have, and which Jacob alluded to, is that by adopting postmodernism they unfortunately picked up the very tool that deconstruct that ground of a literary truth. At best we fall back on a pragmatic truth, as per Richard Rorty. Yet pragmatic truths rely on "what works" and not the kind of relativism that English departments need. Further the fall back to close readings and *defensible* logical discourse is also against their desire. First off that requires a great deal of skill and work. Secondly it means that not all readings are possible. Now if English and Literature departments (and perhaps related disciplines) would just admit that they don't deal in truth and quit throwing the term around I think all would be well. However they need to keep this sense that they are defending the truth. This takes place all the while as their criticism undercuts their own foundations more and more. What is left is a Kafkaesque situation in which they speak jargon without meaning. It doesn't matter whether the jargon is postmodern criticsm, New Criticism of the early 20th century, Speech Act theory, Freudianism or whatever. The point is that what is said is irrelevant to what is done. But this *isn't* a problem of postmodernism. It is a problem that they haven't *accepted* what they use. At least the theory of the early 20th century gave them some leg to stand on. It even explained why Marxist theory or Freudian theory or the other remnants of 19th century materialistic social philosophy was so popular in English departments. It was their claim for a possible defense for how Literature is true. Once those went out of vogue (mainly under the attack of postmodernism) they had to continue to proclaim their message while adopting the language of what destroyed their foundations. Nietzsche's madman couldn't have said it better. The God of these people is dead, their departments are his sarcophaguses. Yet they continue to proclaim it alive and act as his prophet. That leads to the situation like _1984_ where they proclaim one thing while doing its opposite. The problem is that even if you 100% eliminated postmodernism from English and related departments you'd not solve a single thing. The problem is that it is a subject that is inherently subjective and thus completely prone to being a popularity contest. The problem is that while the politics reflect this reality the rhetoric does not. Its just that when the critics see the reality they don't notice that the rhetoric isn't its cause. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Steve" Subject: Re: [AML] Recycling Songs (was: Choose the Rock) Date: 01 Aug 2002 19:01:55 -0600 on 7/31/02 8:53 PM, Nan McCulloch at mcnandon@hotmail.com wrote: > Zoglin cited Paul Simon's struggle to write new music for his musical = > _The Capeman_, "only to see it bomb with the critics and at the box = > office." Then Abba let other artists take their hit songs, "graft them = > onto a flimsy story about a girl looking for her real dad on her wedding = > day and turned _Mamma Mia!_ into a smash hit on Broadway--and just about = > everywhere else in the Western world." Apparently theater goers have = > "fallen in love with rock--so long as it's retro." "Rent" did pretty well recently, but I agree otherwise. So, if we can just fit "Each Cooing Dove," "Like Unto Us" and a song or two from "Promised Valley" together, we'll have the ultimate Mormon retro review. :-) Steve -- skperry@mac.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 01 Aug 2002 19:24:24 -0600 I know I've written more than probably most will read. But I think I ought to post a links that give a historic example of what I'm saying. I just found this googling, so they aren't really part of anything systematic. http://www.cogweb.net/steen/Politics/PatrickSand.html The report of a conference that deals with just what Jacob brought up. It rather illustrates my point since much of the terminology becomes convoluted. Critics of postmodernism Katha Pollitt and Barbara Ehrenreich and Alan Sokal who are liberals and even Marxists are called "left conservatives." This liberal conservatism is then considered equivalent to Rush Limbaugh. While not focusing on it too much the author seems to suggest that we have two bands of liberals competing for who has the right to the mantle of the sixties. (Which for them is a badge of honor) Especially note how the attacks *on* postmodernism come from _The Nation_ and _The Socialist Review_. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "gae lyn henderson" Subject: Re: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 01 Aug 2002 19:31:32 -0700 ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- Reply-To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com >> But I also recognize that postmodernism has some serious weaknesses that >> make it harmfully non-LDS as well--like the absence of even potential >> absolutes or standards. > >You do not refer, of course, to Joseph's words to Nancy Rigdon in his >attempt to get her to accept his proposal for plural marriage (paraphrased): >"What is wrong under one situation can be, and often is, right under another >situation." What is less absolutist than that, a saying that suggests that >marrying a married man may under certain conditions be wrong but may be >correct if God commands it? > >Thom Or if one interprets the burning in the bosom to mean that God has commanded it. Gae Lyn -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] Re: "Choose the Rock" Date: 01 Aug 2002 21:02:39 -0500 Richard Russell: Are there some chords that would NEVER be appropriate? Is that the same with words? _______________ Ooooh. I'm afraid the words trump it in this case. (Some musicologists have questioned whether or not the lost chord might fall into this category). While there would never be an inappropriate chord, in and of itself, there are some situations where a chord, any chord, would not be appropriate, but that would not be the chord's fault. It would be a situational thing again. Sort of like if the organist leaned on the keyboard during the bishop's talk. The chord would be ok (might even be from the closing hymn), but the placement of the chord into that situation would be ill-timed. But some words? Oo la la! Right you are. Here's a funny story about using music in the wrong place. But maybe it was in the right place, because the purpose was to create humor, which the music did because it was in the wrong place. Can words do that? Be right and wrong at the same time? On one of the academy award broadcasts (in the 70s, I think), the value of usually unnoticed background music was being demonstrated. A film clip of a skier sliding down a hill was quite boring and routine, until exciting sounding music was added, ratcheting up the tension with good effect (probably that mysterious E minor chord we've heard so much about lately). Then followed what was announced as an example of using background music in a very inappropriate manner. In this clip, John Wayne stood at one end of a dusty western main street ready to have a shootout with the really, really bad, bad guy. After appropriate establishing shots of the two men, the terrified women on the sidewalk pressed up against the wooden front of the general store, some neighing horses and a tumbleweed (cliches and filler -- just can't do a good story without cliches and filler, can they?), the camera closed in on our hero like a voice from of the dust, er, sorry, from street-level, until John Wayne's towering image nearly filled the screen. Suddenly, the brass section of the orchestra began ripping out a rousing rendition of the theme from The Stripper. The audience became quite uncontrollable. A commercial followed. I've never forgotten the film clip, and I've never remembered the commercial. Gotta run. Hope those bullets are fake. (Where's that PowerPoint slide when I need it?) Oooh, ouch! Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] Re: Programs for Poverty Date: 01 Aug 2002 20:16:48 -0500 Eric, Jacob, Jonathan, Paris and others have have made excellent comments concerning this subject. Here are a few additional notes from the Church Handbook of Instructions which will shed additional clarifying light on the subject. The Handbook says members may use appropriate services in the community to meet their basic needs. . . . The bishop should become familiar with the resources that are available in the community and teach members to maintain gospel standards while using such services. When deciding what welfare assistance to give, the bishop determines whether members are receiving assistance from government or other sources. Bishops should be careful not to duplicate welfare assistance. These two paragraphs, under the heading "Use Appropriate Resources in the Community," come from CHI, page 15, and have never appeared in the Handbook before. Also within those ellipses up there is a short list of services that may be appropriate to use. The list includes professional counselors and some others who are able to provide high-maintenance quality needs. Often, these services are provided by government resources. The Handbook is clear that these resources may be used appropriately, but that the priority is still to achieve self- reliance, turning first within ourselves, then to our family and to the Church. A bishop who understands how the Lords intends to provide for his Saints will know whether or not, and when, these resources will be a blessing or a curse to the members of his flock. We've seen in this thread, sadly but not unexpectedly, that some bishops are still learning these principles, even though these principles are outlined quite clearly in the scriptures and in the Handbook. A book could be written on the subject, but I believe it would mostly contain individual experiences, many quite interesting, and none of assistance to a poor, struggling bishop who is trying to figure out how best to help the member who has gotten into a pickle with a set of problems the bishop hasn't seen before. The bishop wouldn't have time to read it, anyway. Understanding the principles and then listening to the Spirit is the only way out of that kind of a situation. If he attends his stake meetings, a bishop will get a chance quarterly to trade notes with the other bishops in the stake. If that meeting is handled properly, the bishops will be well schooled in assisting members in need. Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Unsavory Etymologies Date: 02 Aug 2002 00:31:33 -0700 The word was supposedly first used by a Franciscan monk in the 13th century in a poem where the letters are spelled out as the first letter of each verse. He was supposed to be trying to record its usage without actually using the word which was then considered far worse than now. There's some evidence that it may be descended from a Pictish word of similar meaning and a bit more evidence that it comes from an Irish Gaelic word that alludes to the strange uses to which Irish chieftains put their mares. The fact is, however, nobody really knows. It was considered so base that it was never written (at least in any suriving form except the above poetry) before the Victorian era, and it's quite likely that its currently popularity is due to a reaction against Victorian mores. Sure is popular these days. It must account for 5% of all words spoken in English. Jim Wilson aka The Laird Jim -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 02 Aug 2002 01:47:14 -0600 ---Original Message From: Thom Duncan > > > But I also recognize that postmodernism has some serious weaknesses > > that make it harmfully non-LDS as well--like the absence of even > > potential absolutes or standards. > > You do not refer, of course, to Joseph's words to Nancy > Rigdon in his attempt to get her to accept his proposal for > plural marriage (paraphrased): "What is wrong under one > situation can be, and often is, right under another > situation." What is less absolutist than that, a saying that > suggests that marrying a married man may under certain > conditions be wrong but may be correct if God commands it? I might be, but not in the way you mean. Sure a given act may be right or wrong because circumstances are different--which appears properly postmodernist. But the *reason* it is right or wrong is because *God* commands it--which couldn't be *less* postmodernist. There is an ultimate "correct" and "all truths may be circumscribed in one great whole." Postmodernism doesn't allow those doctrines--no ultimate authority and no unifying whole. For all the inappropriate appeals to authority that we dislike and argue over, Mormonism *does* have the right to call on *the* ultimate authority to which one will submit or be damned. *Very* un-postmodernist. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] Re: AML-List Dinner Date: 02 Aug 2002 02:28:22 -0600 If my presence is anything that anyone desires, it will need to be Friday or Saturday. -- 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Vholladay5254@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Kerry Blair Query Date: 02 Aug 2002 12:51:51 -0400 Jeff, did you see my review of Kerry's first three books in the last Irreantum? Of all the LDS books I've read and edited in the last 10-year period,Kerry's have been among the most enjoyable for me. Her writing is meant to fit within confines of LDS mainstream fiction, so more literary readers will find fault with her characterization, plot and some other things. But she handles language well and her writing is very clever. She's also a thoroughly wonderful and remarkable person. Valerie -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Possible AML-List Oddities Date: 02 Aug 2002 12:33:32 -0500 At 01:14 AM 8/2/02, Jonathan Langford wrote: >[snip] Oh. When I saw the subject line, I wondered if I had made the list. Never mind. --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 02 Aug 2002 13:36:33 -0600 ___ | Absolutism *isn't* the view that what is wrong varies with | situation. ___ Oops. That should have read "...that what is wrong doesn't vary with situation." My point simply was that when one adopts a situational ethics one isn't being anti-absolutist. Nearly all ethics recognize that the same kind of act can be good or bad depending upon context. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 02 Aug 2002 04:57:23 -0600 ---Original Message From: Clark Goble > ___ Jacob ___ > | And since postmodernism is the tool they are using to > formulate their > | evaluations, postmodernism is, not surprisingly, itself > under attack. > | Since postmodernism cannot be used adequately against > itself and lends > | itself better to liberal than conservative arguments, > | it leaves conservatives who wish to pursue the liberal > | arts with a frustrating dilemma--compromise their > | integrity or find other work. > ___ > > If I'd make a point, it is that postmodernism is neither > conservative nor liberal. Now it is the case that many in > academics are liberal. But that was true before the rise of > postmodernism in America during the 80's and early 90's. > It's just that postmodernism is the latest "fad" in the > social sciences and humanities. To suggest, however, that > postmodernism "lends itself better to liberal than > conservative arguments" doesn't seem right. For instance > postmodernism probably provides a stronger set of arguments > against "PC Speech" than most arguments conservatives were > making. (i.e. the arbitrariness of the sign and the ability > to open up to readings of lines of power any sign and not > just terms like "history" or even "mailman") But postmodernism isn't a neutral tool (politically) for one simple reason. Conservatives, by definition, believe in keeping things the same unless long debate and reason dictate a change, and even then, that change should be introduced slowly and monitored carefully. Liberals, by definition, want extreme changes of social structures and they want it right *now*. Postmodernism, with it's destabilizing arguments and undermining of authority is very much an easier tool for liberal politics than for conservative politics. In fact, it is a tool that true conservatives will inherently distrust and use with some distaste being aware that it can turn on cherished institutions at any moment. Because it attacks standards, the end effect of utilizing postmodernism is to undermine *all* standards--and there are some standards that conservatives very much wish to uphold even if contemporary wisdom demands they don't. > Remember that the core of postmodern attack is to use the > structures and assumptions of a text against itself. The > problem with traditional liberal technique, especially in > academia, is that it assumes a kind of priviledged meta-text > that conservatives are not permitted to question. (i.e. in > environmentalism the "value" of nature, in feminism the > supposed reading of male domination, etc.) Because political > liberalism (and political > conservativism) rests upon priviledged meta-text I think that > postmodernism is a very adept method of criticism. It would be a great method of criticism against any position that is based on a single meta-text. The problem is that conservatives have a single meta-text (reluctance to implement extreme, rapid change) whereas liberals as a group have a million sub-texts all working together without a cohesive framework. PC speech is a great example of this--conservatives don't see a reason to change vocabulary to accommodate what is probably a small core of overly-sensitive people. An easy meta-text to turn on itself--simply find a term that the conservative doesn't wish casually applied to themselves (something along the lines of "rigid", "hide-bound", "wearing blinders" along those lines). Those advocating PC speech, on the other hand, do so from any number of different perspectives--feminism, classism, racism, religi-um-ism (creedism?), what have you. So to 'deconstruct' PC speech, you have to come up with a way to target *every* -ism and that is *much* harder to do, takes more time, and is ultimately doomed to failure because anyone trying will be attacked ferociously by *all* the different -isms in concert. There isn't a corresponding liberal privileged meta-text (i.e. it isn't *liberalism* that is the privileged meta-text, it is the sub-ism that is the privileged meta-text). > Further the "compromise their integrity" seems to suggest > that one is compromising ones integrity if one adopts > postmodern arguments. Not at all. I said that conservatives who wish to succeed in modern academia have to accept a specific *political* postmodernism that compromises their integrity. Conservatives shouldn't find any automatic compromise within postmodernism itself (despite what I said about authority and change--postmodernism *can* fit into a reasonable analysis for conservatives). But to succeed in modern academia, you have to parrot politically *liberal* postmodernism and that very much *is* a compromise of conservative integrity. If you do not, you do not get into masters programs, let alone Ph.D. programs, and you have absolutely *no* shot at tenure. It isn't mastery of postmodernism that is required, it is the ability to regurgitate politically liberal-slanted postmodernism that is required--and *that* is what compromises conservative integrity. > Yet it seems to me that the problem > isn't postmodernism but that some conservatives wish to > attack liberalism in terms of a particular approach to texts. > Yet since postmodernism has rendered such attacks difficult > the conservatives become frustrated. What I want to do is call attention to the fact that they are misusing postmodernism, that their scholarship and techniques are poor, and that their appeals to authority (their academic credentials) should, in the current climate, weigh *against* and not *for* their arguments. What I want to do is tell people that standards *do* have value and that postmodernism *needs* the presence of standards to be useful (postmodernism turned on itself is just too ridiculous to contemplate seriously). I want people to stop being able to say, "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech!" without being laughed out of their career as a philosophy professor in an American University (The quote is from Dr. Kathleen Dixon, then Director of Women's Studies at Bowling Green State University in Ohio--where she is *still* an Associate Professor of Philosophy--on why they wouldn't approve a course on Political Correctness in 2000). I mean, really, other philosophy professors have to have *some* pride in their profession, right? Enough to laugh her out of their profession, right? Can't you see why this is frustrating? It isn't that the attacks are *difficult*, it's that they have no effect, even when they are blatantly, stupendously obvious and pointed out as such. Dr. Richard Zeller, for 25 years a professor of sociology at Bowling Green, who wanted to teach a course on Political Correctness, is mocked to the point of retiring and Dr. Dixon continues on unhindered, the paragon of political correctness. Conservatives had a field-day with Ms. Dixon--but if you weren't a conservative, did you hear about it? (well, besides from me?) Did anything happen? Is there any change? Nope. Things continue to get more ridiculous with all movement happening in the (to me) wrong direction. > ___ Jacob ___ > | But I also recognize that postmodernism has some serious weaknesses > | that make it harmfully non-LDS as well--like the absence of even > | potential absolutes or standards. > ___ > > It's important to realize that postmodernism does *not* make > this claim. Social relativism arose in anthropology and > became mainstream in the more traditional liberalism of the > 50's, 60's and 70's. Probably the best known example of this > was Margaret Mead whose critique of marriage and sexual mores > in America is what most religious people mean when they > attack relativism. I'd add that poststructuralism which > critiques the underlying approach of anthropology does > undermine such relativism by representing in western thought > the notion of the transcendent. > > In a very real way postmodernism is the latest attempt to > avoid this nihilism inherent in many forms of liberalism > (whether they appear in political liberalism or political > conservativism). The way in which this is done varies. It > can be a return to a kind of religious transendence, as found > in French postmodernism or it can be a return to a kind of > pragmatism ala William James as we find in Richard Rorty. Never heard of them. Frankly, I've never heard of postmodernist support for an absolute standard. How, exactly, does postmodernism allow for a standard it doesn't simultaneously undermine? I grant that postmodernism isn't relativism. But it *is* close enough that the confusion is real and possibly warranted. So tell me, how does postmodernism fit in with a God who is absolutely good, absolutely right, and who's righteous dictates are just that--dictates that are right? How could you say philosophically, for example, that homosexual activity is always wrong under a postmodern analysis? > ___ Jacob ___ > | Particularly when those abuses violate core postmodernist > principles > | by setting up an unofficial standard based on a particular > political > | philosophy. > ___ > > Then isn't your criticism really that those claiming to be > postmodernists really aren't? That they are traditional > liberals who've simply wrapped themselves in the robe of > postmodernists? It would seem that the obvious way to attack > such movements is by making postmodern arguments. It would be the obvious way to attack if it would be any use. It isn't. As I attempted to illustrate above, politicized liberal ideologues are allowed to set the rules and control the terminology of the debate. As such, it is not possible to use postmodern arguments against them because they are impervious to any attack originating from within their own system. They control the faculty. They control tenure. They control the college courses where philosophy and literature are taught and they actively screen political conservatives out. That is not a paranoid conspiracy theory--as much as it sounds like one. I'm not calling anybody a secret combination. What it *is*, is a screening process where one specific political ideology has achieved control of the U.S. University structure and those in power are not afraid to wield that control against political opponents and destroy careers based on politically correct ideology. Respect for scholarship is subservient to respect for politics. And that is deadly. The way I see it, the continued use of postmodernism in the process needs to be vigorously decried if we want any hope of rescuing postmodernism from subjugation to political ideology. Right now, postmodernism has become so bound to liberal politics that it is under attack as a tool of the liberal domination of U.S. Universities. If you dislike that, then it would seem to me that your efforts are more wisely aimed against those corrupting the discipline instead of at those of us who are opposing the politics. It comes down to priorities. If your politics take priority over your scholarship, then your scholarship will be sacrificed to your politics. That's why I distinguish *politicized* postmodernism from just postmodernism. Politicized postmodernism is postmodernism in the hands of those who place their politics above their scholarship. In *my* priorities, I will sacrifice my politics to scholarship, research, and the quest for truth *every* *time*. That's the *standard* I want to instigate--that political viewpoints have no bearing on scholastic evaluation. So if you truly want to defend postmodernism, then it is incumbent upon you to correct those misusing postmodernism. I think it is a really bad idea to go the other way and tell people that they should just learn postmodernism better so that they can use it to win politically--particularly when that has already proven to be untrue. > Yet it is > that line of thinking which you seem to view as compromising > ones integrity. Again, you missed the context of that statement. It doesn't compromise conservative integrity to learn and use postmodernism. Conservatives getting ahead on College Campuses today requires them to compromise their integrity because it requires that they adopt a specific *form* of political postmodernism. > The problem isn't "political postmodernism" but rather the > fact that conservatives have basically decided to ignore the > debate and decry the rhetoric. I'm not ignoring the debate--it just hasn't been any use to get in their ring and use their rules. It's become abundantly clear that entering a ring owned by your opponent with rules set by your opponent is a waste of time. The best fighter in the world will lose if he steps into a ring where the referee and all the judges are partisans of his opponent--even if he wins, he loses. Worse, the media coverage is edited by his opponents as well. You can only run into the same brick wall so many times before you start exploring alternate routes. So I'm going to engage on grounds of my choosing and encourage others to do the same. I'm not sure where that can/will be, but it isn't going to be from within University postmodernism. I think that a good place to *start* is by pointing out that politicized postmodernism is weakening our Universities to the point of self-selected, self-reinforced irrelevance. Which is how this whole thing got started--by me pointing out sources that claim (believably) that politicized postmodernism is weakening our Universities (or at least liberal arts) to the point of irrelevance. Say what you will about liberals and conservatives, to me, the thing that has gone horribly wrong is for politics to trump scholarly inquiry and become the determining factor in judging academic merit. And since postmodernism is the political tool, it is time for honest postmodernists of all political stripes to step up to the plate and decry this perversion of their field. It isn't enough to cry "you just don't understand." In the end, it doesn't matter if I *ever* understand postmodernism. What matters is that I see people who cry "academic freedom" to oppose *my* standards who are simultaneously willing to subvert "academic freedom" when supporting their own standards. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 02 Aug 2002 11:43:46 -0600 > > About 10 years ago at my BYU ward I was surprised to see a girl bring in her > guitar to do the musical number in Sacrament meeting. More shocking, when > she > stood up to sing, the bishop pulled his guitar out from behind his seat (I > hadn't seen it earlier) and stood up to play and sing with her. I asked him > about this later, said I was so surprised to see that after having heard you > couldn't do such a thing. He responded that the most important thing was > letting this girl be able participate in the meeting this way. I admired his > attitude. Must not have been too wrong, he was later called as stake > president (or maybe that was his punishment?). > > John Perry > Provo There is a crown of glory in the Celestial Kingdom waiting for this kind, wonderful Bishop who knows what the gospel is about -- placing people before programs. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lynette Jones Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Utopias Date: 02 Aug 2002 11:54:34 -0600 Kathy wrote: >Is this primarily a Utah phenomenon? If so, I count myself >blessed to reside in California. Sadly, this is a struggle in many places. I've heard new bishops in wards of the Southern United States decry publicly the fact that the Saints of Mexico help keep the welfare programs of the South in the black. I've heard Bishops of western parts of Salt Lake County decry their members for the fact that other parts of the valley and country keep their stakes in the black on welfare needs. I have come to the conclusion that much less of that is needed and much more of a forum about Mosiah 4:24. I would like to challenge someone to take us on a journey of exploring how this applies to several different saints of varying incomes, because few of us has what we consider enough. In fact, it is very true that the more we have, the harder it is to tithe. It is also harder to increase our fast offerings to reflect our greater income. The whole of Mosiah 4 would be a good outline for the story. The phrase "if I had" brings up a whole slue of scripture. I have a lot of respect for those who suffer and must use the LDS Church Welfare system. Some few Bishops and Relief Society Presidents have been burned by those who live to use the system. That is one place that LDS Social Services can and should help. But, Social Services are very limited at this time, mostly because we are still so deeply in the "dark ages" concerning the causes and therefore the healing of mental health. Lynette Jones -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "jana" Subject: Re: [AML] Irreantum Cutbacks Date: 02 Aug 2002 11:13:55 -0700 ----- Original Message ----- > Irreantum's printing costs have recently increased by 75% at BYU, and the > AML's finances have reached drought status. As a result, we are now forced > to regress the magazine to staple binding, reduce page count, and stop > sending out as many free sample copies. > Chris: Exactly how much would it cost, per issue, to maintian the perfect binding and the higher page count? Jana Remy -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: Re: [AML] Kerry Blair Query Date: 02 Aug 2002 15:31:32 -0700 I don't get the print magazine on a regular basis, so I likely didn't see it. But thanks for the info! I'll pass it along to my friend. *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 8/2/2002 at 12:51 PM Vholladay5254@aol.com wrote: >Jeff, did you see my review of Kerry's first three books in the last >Irreantum? ----------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 02 Aug 2002 16:35:33 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 1:47 AM > ---Original Message From: Thom Duncan > > > > > But I also recognize that postmodernism has some serious weaknesses > > > that make it harmfully non-LDS as well--like the absence of even > > > potential absolutes or standards. > > > > You do not refer, of course, to Joseph's words to Nancy > > Rigdon in his attempt to get her to accept his proposal for > > plural marriage (paraphrased): "What is wrong under one > > situation can be, and often is, right under another > > situation." What is less absolutist than that, a saying that > > suggests that marrying a married man may under certain > > conditions be wrong but may be correct if God commands it? > > I might be, but not in the way you mean. Sure a given act may be right > or wrong because circumstances are different--which appears properly > postmodernist. But the *reason* it is right or wrong is because *God* > commands it--which couldn't be *less* postmodernist. Actually, one cannot prove that God says anything, only that one believes God said something. God can be used to rationalize immoral behavior just as he can be used to teach moral behavior. > There is an > ultimate "correct" and "all truths may be circumscribed in one great > whole." Postmodernism doesn't allow those doctrines--no ultimate > authority and no unifying whole. For all the inappropriate appeals to > authority that we dislike and argue over, Mormonism *does* have the > right to call on *the* ultimate authority to which one will submit or be > damned. *Very* un-postmodernist. As long as Mormonism continues to teach that Man has free will, that man is ultimately responsible for his own choices, how can that be un_postmodernist? How can God honor a person's free will choice if, in making that choice, they commit a horrible sin? If Free Agency means anything, it means that my version of Mormonism as revealed to me by my personal wrestlings with the Spirit is just as valid in the long run as your version of Mormonism, or anybody else's for that matter. An example of perfectly acceptable versions of Mormonism, neither of which will get you in trouble. Let's say you pay tithing on your gross income and I pay it on my net. According to the Church Handbook of Instructions, either form is considered acceptable tithing, and either form will not prevent you from getting a temple recommend. And that's only one example of our very postmodern religion. Seeing R-rated movies for instance will not prevent you from getting a TR. There is no One-Size-Fits-All Mormonism. Such creedism is what Joseph decried. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 02 Aug 2002 18:50:00 -0600 ___ Jacob ___ | But the *reason* it is right or wrong is because *God* commands | it--which couldn't be *less* postmodernist. There is an | ultimate "correct" and "all truths may be circumscribed in one | great whole." Postmodernism doesn't allow those doctrines--no | ultimate authority and no unifying whole. ___ Once again this isn't quite true. Postmodernism certainly changes how we look at these things, but it doesn't decry ultimate authority. Indeed two main figures who appear in postmodernism - Heidegger and Derrida - often treat Being as this authority. There's a great book that compares Heidegger to some of the classic neoplatonic theologians of the medieval period called _Forms of Transcendence: Heidegger and Medieval Mystical Theology_. Likewise Caputo's _The Mystical Element in Heidegger's Thought_ goes through how he treats Being itself in a manner akin to Meister Eckhart, the great mystic theologian. Now *how* Heidegger views the transcendent is different from what we find in modernism (roughly thought since Descartes) But that this Being is the absolute seems quite apparent. Where these forms of postmodernism critique modernism is in the idea that there are grand narratives we can make that *prescribe* how Being gives to us our encounter with the world. Put an other way, it is the view that Being determines all this and we *can't* say why Being does what it does. We can merely accept what is given. Now this view of Being (ultimate reality) seems a little different from what we find in Mormon thought. We make a clear separation between God and Being and the source of life. God is in the universe. For traditional Christian theologians God is the creator all ex nihlo and thus they can make a connection between God and Being. (Although in so doing they often do run into their own problems of heresy) Mormons however can simply accept that existence is how existence is -- without why. God accepts this and works within this just as we do. The only thing we can state for sure is that existence has been given to us as it is given. And that is a rather absolute pronouncement. Further the Mormon view that something is true *because* God commands it is itself open to analysis. What does it mean for God to demand? Is it true because God commands it or does God command it because it is true? In other words is God creating reality or is God existing within reality and working in accord with its limits. There are many interesting theological issues here. I think that the Mormon position moves these questions out of the ontological arena (as questions of the nature of existence) and into the social arena. In other words when we speak of God commanding we are speaking of a relationship between the commanded (in this case Joseph Smith) and the commander (in this case God). The nature is *not* ontological, as traditional Christianity tends to assume, but fundamentally social in a manner akin to how a father relates to a son. Very postmodern. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kimheuston@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Unsavory Etymologies Date: 03 Aug 2002 13:54:04 EDT I've been waiting for someone to add that American colonial court records are full of the acronym for fornication and unlawful carnal knowledge. Kimberley (Heuston) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 03 Aug 2002 17:12:34 -0600 Thanks for pointing those specifics out, Larry. I was unaware of those statements and it looks to me like Jonathan's points were closer to the mark than my own. It seems that the key is the wise use of resources and the goal of self-reliance. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BroHam000@aol.com Subject: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 03 Aug 2002 20:12:02 EDT I just finished reading In This Mountain, the latest installment in the=20 Mitford series by Jan Karon. I am curious to see how many on the list are= =20 familiar with this series, and what your thoughts are on it. =20 I think they're wonderful books. For those who don't know the series, each= =20 book revolves around an Episcopalian minister, Timothy Kavanaugh, his=20 ministry, his life, and the lives of those around him. If you think it=20 sounds mundane, you're partly right. What is a marvel to me is that Karon= =20 fills the mundane life with meaning, inspiration, and joy (which is the way= =20 it's supposed to be, but what a gift to be able to capture that!). The=20 stories are everything that make for a good read, without any sensationalism= =20 or pandering. Honestly, I am filled with admiration. All the characters= are=20 "everyday people", whose lives are very Hometown America - and they are=20 totally endearing. Further, Karon tackles extremely difficult situations= and=20 moral conflicts head on, with no pat resolutions, while chronicling very=20 believable growth in her characters. I can't say enough about how I enjoy= =20 and appreciate this very wholesome, uplifting, and edifying literature=20 (section 50:13-24). Anybody else out there care to address the Mitford=20 books? Linda Hyde -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: [AML] E.R. PAUL, _Science, Religion, and Mormon Cosmology_ (Review) Date: 03 Aug 2002 18:43:46 -0600 Title: Science, Religion, and Mormon Cosmology Author: Erich Robert Paul Publisher: University of Illinois Press Year Published: 1992 Binding: Hardcover ISBN: 0252018958 Price: $32.50 Reviewed by Clark Goble I originally bought this book it for Paul's discussion of how the early apostle Orson Pratt integrated science and religion. Surprisingly the book turned out not to focus on theology that much. It thus isn't what most might expect from the title. I must confess, however, that I found the book a pleasant surprise. It focuses less on the specifics of how Mormons have dealt with scientific assertions than the general sweep of science in Mormonism. That isn't a bad thing. Indeed it is just those sorts of questions in history that have brought a recognition that science, especially in the 17th and 18th centuries, was more complex than many thought. Over the last few decades, historians have seriously rethought the relationship between science and religion. The traditional view of a "war' between them is misleading and usually incorrect. Paul adroitly applies these recent movements from the philosophy of science to the history of Mormon thought. Given that approach, a lot of Paul's book will be familiar if you are already read recent history and philosophy of science. Paul shows how the changing view of science within Mormon corresponds to the view of science by America in general. His thesis is that the acceptance of science by Mormonism was partially due to Americans in general not distinguishing between science and technology. Since technology brought wealth and progress, science was good. It was not until the 1940's that Mormon apostle-scientists like John Widstoe began discussing science as a fallible and tentative approach to knowledge. Before then a relatively na=EFve adoption of scientific realism was the rule of the day. (Best seen in Orson Pratt's odd adoption of Newtonian mechanism to Nauvoo theology) Paul deals with the "anti-science" and neoliteralist movements in Mormonism but puts them, I think, into their proper context. He discusses things like how Evangelical creationist arguments made it into the CES manual of the 1980's and some of McConkies writings. However he doesn't take the myopic view that I think many commentators have. Further I think he provides a very good argument for why debate within Mormonism over Genesis tends to be largely irrelevant in the minds of most Mormons. Even when there is a caution and worry about things like evolution (as even in Widstoe and Talmage), there also is a sense that it is less pressing and significant an issue than for Evangelicalism. This is because the *important* issue for Mormon theology isn't the physical creation of man but the spiritual relationship between man and God. The focus of "creation" for Mormons isn't the creation of mortal bodies, but our pre-mortal existence. The issue of material creation is thus less a theological problem than it simply is an issue of literal approaches to scriptural exegesis. I'd not thought of the issue in that way before, but I think Paul is quite right. Unfortunately Paul doesn't deal with the specific issue of Mormon materialism. He instead focuses in on Mormon thought relative to general cosmology and the issue of a plurality of worlds. While this once was a big issue in the history of science and religion, I'm not sure it is that interesting to a modern audience. Still he does deal with some issues in the history of Mormonism. For example he deals with Fawn Brody's discussion of Thomas Dick influence on early Mormon thought. He provides good arguments for why Dick's theological and science writings weren't that significant an impact on early Mormonism. (I've read all of Dicks works and had reached much the same conclusions) Overall Paul doesn't deal with a lot of interesting theological issues that arise between Mormon thought and the science. For instance Moreland in _The New Mormon Challenge_ has raised some questions regarding Mormon materialism. As I mentioned, despite ignoring many specific issues in Mormon theology, it does provide a very useful discussion of science *in* Mormonism. It is helpful to remember that within Mormonism a form of scientism reigned for nearly 40 years. Since Paul is a historian of science, he is able to discuss these issues in terms of the general history of science. This context has often been ignored when historians have examined Mormon thought. For instance many people might find Paul's discussion of hermeticism a useful balance to the way Quinn discusses the general issue. (Paul doesn't spend a huge amount of time on the issue, but does point out the relationship between hermeticism and science and ties this to Mormon theology) If you are looking for a general book about the basic approach of Mormonism to science, then it is probably difficult to imagine anyone writing a better book. As I mentioned there are many issues the author doesn't go into. He doesn't attempt to provide a modern way of reconciling Mormon theology with science, for instance. He does, however, provide good reasons why such quests have been less relevant since the 1940's though. We simply don't have systems of theology such as by Roberts or Pratt who attempt to reconcile science and theology as a consistent system of metaphysics. While some might criticize the book for what it isn't, that hardly seems fair. For what the book attempts to do it succeeds admirably. Overall I recommend the book whole-heartedly. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: daryoung@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 04 Aug 2002 19:19:34 GMT Scott wrote: "Their son had been a wrestling champion and they compared his hard work in becoming a star wrestler to becoming a star worker in the mission field. When his mother stood up to lead off the talks, she quoted the lyrics to 'We Are the Champions' by Queen and used that song to establish a theme that all the other speakers addressed." Did the person who was asked to say the benediction cry out, "Give me an R! Give me an O! Give me a C! Give me a K! Give me a Y!"? I wouldn't have been able to sit through those talks with a straight face. (If you don't know what I'm alluding to, you've got to go read Neal Chandler's "Benediction," one of the best LDS short stories ever written.) Darlene Young ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Call for Entries: Eclipse Film Festival Date: 05 Aug 2002 14:22:58 -0500 The Eclipse Film Festival in St. George, Utah will be held November 8th and 9th this year. The event is presented by the Community Arts Division, City of St. George. Matthew Fackrell is one of the principle organizers. The festival's organizers are calling for entries, and are particularly interested in films by Utah filmmakers. Important dates: September 6th: Early Submission Deadline September 20th: Late Submission Deadline October 4th: Accepted Films Announced October 14th: Tickets Go On Sale November 8th & 9th: Eclipse Film Festival, 2002 Entry Fee: For short films and short documentaries, $15 for the early submission before September 6th, and $20 for late submissions after September 6th and before September 20th. For Feature Films, $25 for early submission and $35 for late submissions. More information available on the festival's website: http://www.eclipsefilmfest.com/ Previous winners at the festival include BYU film students Bryan Lefler and Krisi Church. Preston Hunter -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Moderator on Postmodernism Etc. Date: 05 Aug 2002 16:00:00 -0500 Folks, This discussion has been interesting, and I think there's still a lot of positive territory that it could cover. I'd like to encourage everyone to remember, however, that the topic of AML-List is neither university politics nor philosophy, though both both of these touch fairly closely on matters that *are* on-topic for AML-List. For now, I'd like to encourage people to keep on writing and responding, but to try to shift the focus somewhat to discussing the effect of postmodernism on literary interpretation and the practice of literature. In the process, it's certainly appropriate to comment on both (a) how postmodernism and its uses have affected the experience of those studying literature (as students or professors), and (b) how literary types have used and/or abused the philosophical ideas that underlie postmodernism. But I'd like to see an emphasis on the literary tie-in. Given the fact that AML-List volume is pretty light right now, I don't plan to be hardnosed about this. Just a suggestion that I think it would be good to try to tie the topic closer to AML-List's true subject area. Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful participation. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Irreantum Cutbacks Date: 05 Aug 2002 14:37:58 -0600 Thanks for asking, Jana. It would take about $700-800 extra per issue to maintain 100 pages, perfect bound. Right now we have a great summer issue (Terry Tempest Wms, Levi Peterson, Dan Wotherspoon, several more) that we're trying to decide what to cut from. One concern is that renewal rates and people who subscribe after receiving a sample issue are both fairly low. I wonder if the magazine lacks interest or has too broad a focus (trying to cover the full cultural spectrum). I'm personally committed to continuing the magazine in some form as long as circulation stays above 100, but I would be open to someone else coming forward with a stronger vision and demonstration that they can and will keep the quarterly going. FYI, right now the magazine's paid circulation is 240 AML members, 88 Irreantum-only subscribers, and 30 retail copies, for a total paid circulation of about 350. That's neither a low point nor a high point, but the trend is currently downward. If anyone has some tax-deductible charitable funds handy, that would be great, otherwise we'll downshift and move forward in a lower gear for now. Chris Bigelow -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "jana" Subject: [AML] Carol Lynn PEARSON, _Day Old Child_ (Review) Date: 03 Aug 2002 23:03:51 -0700 This review is by Delsa Anderson Day-Old Child and other Celebrations of Motherhood. By Carol Lynn Pearson Illus. By Traci O'Very Covey Gibbs Smith, Publisher (Layton, Utah) 2001; 32 pp. ISBN 1-58685-072-5=20 Suggested Retail Price: $9.95 The best way to read Carol Lynn Pearson's new book is aloud, so you will = more surely notice her sly rhymes and the rhythm of her style. When you = read silently, as my granddaughter once said, explaining the speed which = is so much faster than reading aloud: "There's this thing you do with = your eyes!" However, that same speed can enable Carol Lynn's nuanced = phrases and tricky, sometimes Ogden Nash-like rhymes to elude you. For = instance, in her poem Diapering at 4:00 a.m., notice the placement of = stratagem and 4:00 a.m. He created the heavens and the earth And the seas, and the naked, needing Infants crying to be held. He thought it all up This clever stratagem. And yet- I'll bet he smiled When he thought about diapering at 4:00 A.M. Carol Lynn is quirky, and takes us unaware with a sudden knowledge that = she has slipped in another rhyme. But where is it? What word, or group = of words, in this case, did she use to get past our guard? Her rhymes = are never where you expect them to be. I liked Mother to Child, especially the first phrase. Look- Your little fist fits mine Like the pit in a plum. ******* I'm your mother, true, But in the end Merely an older equal Doing her faltering best For a dear, small friend. In The Ninth Month, she speaks to her unborn baby. Being a duplex I have been happy, my dear, To loan you half the house Rent-free and furnished As best I could. You have been a good Tenant, all in all Quiet, yet comfortably there Tapping friendly on the wall. ******* But we will keep in touch. There are bonds, my dear, That reach beyond a block Or a mile or a hemisphere Born of much love and labor. I approve the move And gladly turn from landlady To neighbor. The illustration is delightful, showing the mother's torso as a house = with a small locked cottage attached, and mother just unlocking the = door. The illustrations deserve attention, as there is one to illustrate = almost every poem, and they are an integral part of the book. First you = notice the ovals. Although I tired of the salmon-and-pink color = scheme; the illustrations by Traci O'Very Covey were sometimes very = clever, sometimes mundane, but always egg-inspired. Even the straight = lines were curvy. Motherhood was the theme--the ovum the scheme. Mother, = baby, downtown skyline, megaphone-all straight lines curved. Pearson = and Covey have collaborated before, in Fuzzy Red Bathrobe. Day-Old Child has probably been read aloud more than any other of Carol = Lynn's poems since the year her first book of poetry came out. It's a = favorite in Relief Society, Mother's Day Programs, and the home. It's = the lead poem in this book; it's also the title. As you reread it, = then continue with the collection, you can see the change from the = conventional every-other-line rhyming system to her present, seemingly = haphazard placement of offbeat rhymes. I don't think this poet is ever = haphazard. The poems that would seem to be so "easy to write" have a = singular warm charm and denouements that catch the reader off guard. This is a very small gift book, so the price seems heavy: $9.95 plus 7% = tax =3D $10.25, divided by 8 ounces (which includes the dust cover) = comes to $1.25 per ounce. The new mother or the old mother who receives = this book will probably cherish every ounce, if she's a Pearson fan. = Count me in that group. Somewhere, in almost every poem, she manages to = surprise me. Target audience: Mothers of any age, Pearson fans; gift buyers for = mothers. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Susan Malmrose" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 05 Aug 2002 13:51:38 -0700 > Scott wrote: > > "Their son had been a wrestling champion and > they compared his hard work in becoming a star wrestler to becoming a star > worker in the mission field. > > When his mother stood up to lead off the talks, she quoted the lyrics to 'We > Are the Champions' by Queen and used that song to establish a theme that all > the other speakers addressed." Yesterday in testimony meeting a young father who had just blessed his baby bore his testimony, and he talked about how when he was a kid his father took him driving in a fancy Cadillac, blaring Derek and the Dominos (one of Eric Clapton's early bands), a song called "Why Does Love Got To Be So Sad?" He shared how his father took that opportunity to explain to him why love doesn't have to be sad--and tied it in to temple marriage. I guess a lot of rock music provides excellent teaching moments, if nothing else. :) Susan M -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 05 Aug 2002 15:04:48 -0600 ___ Jacob ___ | Conservatives, by definition, believe in keeping things the | same unless long debate and reason dictate a change, and even | then, that change should be introduced slowly and monitored | carefully. ___ This is another example of why I think the "liberal" - "conservative" terminology is more misleading than helpful. For instance much of modern conservatism is anything but classically conservative. It is all about ideologically driven change. Now some of those changes may hearken back to a culture or ideology of the past. But it can't really be called conservative. If we are speaking about "political conservatism" in America I think we are more talking about what might be called progressive liberalism (the left wing of the Democratic party) and what might be called Reaganism (the right wing of the Republican party) Beyond that you almost always end up equivocating over the many senses of the terms "liberal" and "conservative." This is how we end up with such oxymoronic statements like "conservative liberal." Part of the problem is that the conservative - liberal taxonomy assumes there are only two views when in fact there are *many* views. (And I'd add that I think this desire for simplicity is itself the cause of many problems) ___ Jacob ___ | Liberals, by definition, want extreme changes of social | structures and they want it right *now*. ___ I think if you read through the link I posted you'll see that the current debate about postmodernism is really about liberals who fit the "conservative" definition you gave above and liberals who want something different. I don't think your use of the term "liberal" is really that helpful. ___ Jacob ___ | Postmodernism, with it's destabilizing arguments and | undermining of authority is very much an easier tool for | liberal politics than for conservative politics. ___ Not at all for the simple case that tradition political liberalism simply disagrees with traditional political conservatism over what the authority is. Both require authority. This is why so many liberals fear postmodernism. It undercuts their claims to authority (a meta-text) as much as anyone else. This is why it shook up both Marxism and Freudianism, as I've mentioned. Further many would say that a kind of laissez-faire competition of ideas and capital is what many mean by "conservatism." Yet that is itself a move against authority. Indeed if you read some of the liberal rhetoric about postmodernism you'll find it is this fear of capitalism into academia that really makes them worry about postmodernism. This is why many of these traditional liberals react by calling postmodernists capitalists or even conservatives like Rush Limbaugh. Really, the battle in academia is quite different than you describe. One need only do a google search of conservatism and postmodernism shows that most of the debate is liberal postmodernists making apologetics of postmodernism so that they *aren't* considered the same as Rush Limbaugh. If your view of postmodernism in English departments is true, why this odd discourse going on at the moment? The fact is that English departments were co-opted by "political liberalism" decades before postmodernism was discovered by the humanities. ___ Jacob ___ | The problem is that conservatives have a single meta-text | (reluctance to implement extreme, rapid change) whereas liberals | as a group have a million sub-texts all working together | without a cohesive framework. ___ As I mentioned your view of conservatism is as problematic as your view of liberalism. It's hard to call the revolution of 1994 and the Contract With America conservative in your use. (Just look at the rhetoric used) Further to seriously argue that conservatives have a single meta-text demonstrates perfectly this rhetorically lumping together of radically different movements. For instance there is often a *huge* gap between social conservatives, such as are found in the "moral majority" and economic conservatives who promote more laissez-faire approaches to government. Most importantly you've changed the terms "liberal" and "conservative" away from either their academic methodology, their ideology, or even their epistemology to a "likes change" vs. "dislikes change." Thus Newt Gingrich is a liberal and the democrats become the conservative party. ___ Jacob ___ | What I want to do is tell people that standards *do* have value | and that postmodernism *needs* the presence of standards to be | useful (postmodernism turned on itself is just too ridiculous | to contemplate seriously). ___ How can postmodernism *not* be turned on itself? I think that your understanding of postmodernism doesn't match mine. Further what do you mean by "standards?" It would seem to me that in academia of *all* places it is most important to question standards. That doesn't mean to simply reject them. As I've said there is a huge difference between skepticism, relativism, cynicism and postmodernism. ___ Jacob ___ | Can't you see why this is frustrating? ___ I can see why you're frustrated. But that's not the issue (as I see it). The problem is how you are analyzing the problem. ___ Jacob ___ | How, exactly, does postmodernism allow for a standard it | doesn't simultaneously undermine? ___ Existence. Repetition is untrustworthy but there is a given. We encounter the world. That fact of encountering is absolute. Might I suggest you read through Jim Faulconer's essay on postmodernism? He goes through a few of these issues. http://www.nd.edu/~rpotter/pomo.html I listed several major postmodernists who speak of this. That you appear unfamiliar with these things which form the rhetorical foundation of postmodernism make one question your attacks on postmodernism. Are you really sure what postmodernism is? Now certainly postmodernism rethinks these things. However these issues have changed in how they have been viewed over time. For instance the change ushered in by Descartes was a massive change over what went before. If you are interested in the issue, I'd suggest looking at Levinas' discussion of ethics as arising from the absolute alterity of the other we encounter. Originally this was discussed in the context of our encountering God, but came to be viewed in terms of our encounter with any person as other. (Other than who we are) Levinas has been a popular thinker at BYU precisely because of how he explains the abolute nature of God. It is a way that allows Mormonism to keep a notion of the absolute without following the mistakes of Hellenism, Scholasticism and Modernism. ___ Jacob ___ | I'm not ignoring the debate--it just hasn't been any use to | get in their ring and use their rules. It's become abundantly | clear that entering a ring owned by your opponent with rules | set by your opponent is a waste of time. ___ In other words your complain has *nothing* to do with postmodernism. It is simply the fact that liberals control most of the humanity departments and don't like conservatives. They don't play fair and so you are upset. It has nothing to do with postmodernism at all but simply office politics. ___ Jacob ___ | What matters is that I see people who cry "academic freedom" | to oppose *my* standards who are simultaneously willing to | subvert "academic freedom" when supporting their own standards. ___ Then why attack postmodernism? Why not just attack people who are hypocrites? This is why this is my pet peeve. It seems like "conservatives" (whatever that means) are upset at not getting a fair shake and so start attacking something unrelated. It doesn't make much sense. It is akin to those suffering economic problems to find some racial group to stereotype for their problems. Conservatives can't (or more likely won't) battle the hegemony in the humanities and so instead look for an academic whipping boy. It is a rather odd phenomena. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 05 Aug 2002 15:44:12 -0700 Funny stuff, I tried to read the first book, got about 100 pages into it, and dropped it. I don't know if I just wasn't in the mood at the time. I may have to try again. ----------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 05 Aug 2002 16:52:04 -0600 A long time ago Thom Duncan wrote, responding to Margaret Young: > > Further wasn't institutional racism really mainly a manifestation of > > individual racism? Other than structural changes that took place in 1978 > > (the theological nature of which is still debatable) what did the > > institution (rather than individuals) do wrong? > > It allowed the untruths of certain very important Apostles and their > Sons-in-Law to be published with the apparent agreement of the Church. We > realize now that Mormon Doctrine by McConkie contained thousands of > doctrinal errors and even though it was initially quashed, it was eventually > published. Several generations of Mormons were influenced by MD and its > personal opinions posing as official doctrine. The institution (meaning the > Church) could have insisted that the book never be published and even now, > could insist that it be taken off the market. I've been thinking about this for a while, and I may have to reverse myself on the desire to see some sort of direct statement from the Church on (what I see as the error of) the historical priesthood ban. My reasons relate at least partially to Thom's statement here. The Church has largely stayed out of endorsing any particular book--and by extension decrying any particular book. That choice is not unlike the effort to stay out of political or social discussions, as well. Yes, the Church has been known to participate actively in both, but the policy during my generation has been to keep a distance. Perhaps that's because they don't want to issue statement that they'll have apologize for later. Perhaps it's because they don't want to generate more heat on a particular issue that could create divides among members with different ideas on the issue. Maybe it's because the Brethren haven't come to full agreement on the issue and thus can't make a unified statement. Maybe there is no orthodox answer. Maybe it's because the vast majority of issues that people get excited about are a matter of individual choice and not institutional direction. Maybe we have to decide most of this stuff for ourselves, and it's to our ultimate good to be forced to research and pray on our own rather than await an orthodox institutional pronouncement. We've had this discussion before and come to little agreement on what the role of the institution should be; I doubt we'll find resolution on the issue in the near future. But from my perspective it's one of the fundamental questions of our relationship as individuals to the Church--how many of our opinions do we need to have taught from the pulpit? Similarly, how important is it for us as individuals to prove other individuals wrong? It's a difficult question for me. As it turns out, the commonly held belief among the leadership of the Church for many, many years was that Joseph Smith instituted the priesthood ban, yet the earliest specific reference to that policy was offered by Brigham Young sometime in the 1850s (I think). It turns out they were wrong in their assumption, and that they supported a policy based at least partially on incorrect information. Does that invalidate them as men of God trying as hard as they can to do the right thing? I don't think it does. When President Kimball was considering the change in policy it turns out that he asked Brother McConkie to research the question of scriptural or revelatory basis for the policy banning blacks. Brother McConkie came back with the conclusion that there was no actual doctrinal basis for the policy--despite his own very strong opinions on the matter. He learned, he changed, and he supported President Kimball with vigor in his decision to move forward and change the policy. Though he had reservations about mixed race marriages as a social challenge, he fully supported the new policy. Their hearts had changed, and so the policy could also change. It's been argued that the reason for the ban was not because of any alleged premortal unrighteousness by blacks, but as a test for both blacks and whites to see how we would all treat each other within that context--and to see how we would all act when the policy was changed. That makes a lot of sense to me. A lot of people have a hard time with the fact that Church leaders are sometimes just plain wrong, and that fact tests their faith in very serious ways. But what good does it do us to condemn? We've learned better, so now the right answer is to move forward in the light of that new knowledge. I think we often feel betrayed because we trusted the source to be absolutely correct (or at least "most correct") on the subject. But even the GAs are learning. So maybe it's best to leave most issues alone, be they social or political ideas offered in books or talks. If nothing else Brother McConkie taught us to learn the truth of any principle for ourselves, and that even the GAs are not yet perfect in knowledge or works. It's why personal study is still pushed as a critical foundation of a personal testimony. Which is not to say we should mistrust the words of the General Authorities, but rather that we should always seek our own confirmation. So maybe the Church has neither responsibility nor right to issue apologies or statements of regret. But I still think the Church can provide correlated materials that do help explain the context, the facts, and the reasons that led to change. When used as part of a lesson plan on continuing revelation and the evolution of the Church that includes a direct discussion of both the polygamy issue and the priesthood ban. Studying the ways we have changed as a Church is just as important as studying the ways we've stayed the same--and discussing the differences and reasons for each. In the meantime, what I'd *really* like to see is a book published through DB that offers that context in clear terms. The fact is that John Lund's book _The Church and the Negro_ is still accepted by many as doctrine; I would like to see a new book that directly addresses the fallacies and misconceptions that book so eloquently perpetuated. Those ideas reflected the belief of one generation and informed the understanding of at least one more generation. As a new generation seeks wisdom from their fathers, those ideas can be passed on to yet another generation (my father in law lent me the book from his personal library). Part of the problem is that the core doctrinal assumption of Lund's book--that some people were born into black skin (aka, a cursed bloodline) as a consequence of premortal failure--existed only in order to justify the priesthood ban. Remove the ban, and the speculation on premortal righteousness has no purpose. Yet many hold to that doctrine despite it's vague foundations and (now) unclear need. It was a step on the path toward better knowledge; now that we have new knowledge I believe we should directly and clearly discard the less complete reasonings so they can no longer confuse. This can be done with a new book that has the power to inform and educate people in the safety of their private places. Given a few years to perpetuate, these new ideas become common in only a few years. When the official curriculum of the Church reflects that new understanding, a new generation now has a completely fresh foundation on which to develop an even greater understanding. It's through the foundational literature that we learn and change and grow. Some ideas are best offered through historical or doctrinal works; some through fiction or essay. Our struggle to learn more and better is just as important a part of our collective literature as the fact of change or the explication of new understanding. Many struggle to accept and integrate new ideas; fiction and essay have the power to dramatize that struggle and show people that's it's okay to struggle with change. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Vacation Schedule Date: 06 Aug 2002 23:18:42 -0500 Folks, I'm currently on vacation, and so delivery of AML-List messages is likely to be somewhat spotty. For example, today I'm getting the day's ratio of messages out late night Utah time. However, I do plan to keep posting messages on a daily basis. Please simply keep sending them in, and I'll try to keep up as well as I can. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 05 Aug 2002 15:15:05 -0600 At 08:12 PM 8/3/02 -0400, you wrote: >Anybody else out there care to address the Mitford books? I, too, enjoy these books a great deal. Father Tim is a very good man while displaying many of the typical male flaws, just as his wife is a good person while displaying certain irritating feminine traits. He is a fine leader of the flock, but at least once yields to sugar lust and eats himself into a diabetic coma! (Well, that marmelade cake does sound good.) She is a wonderful children's writer, but doesn't understand why he gets miffed when she says, "I want the sofa over there, No, over there. No, over there." It's fun watching them. And the secondary characters in Mitford are real hoots! Yet the books address difficult issues such as child neglect and abuse or dealing with a spouse who has lost her marbles or coming to grips with a long-buried guilt. I don't consider the books proselyting, either -- why is everyone afraid any book with Mormons in it will be pushy? Like Amway, we have a reputation! I bought all these books for my mom, and she loved them. I have them on tape, and listen to them when I need something calmer that stories of the Napoleonic Wars or finding the annual dead body in the Peabody/Emerson books. barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Shelly Johnson-Choong" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 05 Aug 2002 14:35:47 -0700 Susan wrote: > Yesterday in testimony meeting a young father who had just blessed his baby > bore his testimony, and he talked about how when he was a kid his father > took him driving in a fancy Cadillac, blaring Derek and the Dominos (one of > Eric Clapton's early bands), a song called "Why Does Love Got To Be So Sad?" > He shared how his father took that opportunity to explain to him why love > doesn't have to be sad--and tied it in to temple marriage. > > I guess a lot of rock music provides excellent teaching moments, if nothing > else. :) > I use some of the lyrics from Eric Clapton's BROKEN HEARTED in a presentation I give about repentance and purity. Inevitably after the presentation, folks come up to me and ask for the lyrics. They want to read them to their seminary class or other group of young people. Shelly (Johnson-Choong) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 05 Aug 2002 16:52:04 -0600 A long time ago Thom Duncan wrote, responding to Margaret Young: > > Further wasn't institutional racism really mainly a manifestation of > > individual racism? Other than structural changes that took place in 1978 > > (the theological nature of which is still debatable) what did the > > institution (rather than individuals) do wrong? > > It allowed the untruths of certain very important Apostles and their > Sons-in-Law to be published with the apparent agreement of the Church. We > realize now that Mormon Doctrine by McConkie contained thousands of > doctrinal errors and even though it was initially quashed, it was eventually > published. Several generations of Mormons were influenced by MD and its > personal opinions posing as official doctrine. The institution (meaning the > Church) could have insisted that the book never be published and even now, > could insist that it be taken off the market. I've been thinking about this for a while, and I may have to reverse myself on the desire to see some sort of direct statement from the Church on (what I see as the error of) the historical priesthood ban. My reasons relate at least partially to Thom's statement here. The Church has largely stayed out of endorsing any particular book--and by extension decrying any particular book. That choice is not unlike the effort to stay out of political or social discussions, as well. Yes, the Church has been known to participate actively in both, but the policy during my generation has been to keep a distance. Perhaps that's because they don't want to issue statement that they'll have apologize for later. Perhaps it's because they don't want to generate more heat on a particular issue that could create divides among members with different ideas on the issue. Maybe it's because the Brethren haven't come to full agreement on the issue and thus can't make a unified statement. Maybe there is no orthodox answer. Maybe it's because the vast majority of issues that people get excited about are a matter of individual choice and not institutional direction. Maybe we have to decide most of this stuff for ourselves, and it's to our ultimate good to be forced to research and pray on our own rather than await an orthodox institutional pronouncement. We've had this discussion before and come to little agreement on what the role of the institution should be; I doubt we'll find resolution on the issue in the near future. But from my perspective it's one of the fundamental questions of our relationship as individuals to the Church--how many of our opinions do we need to have taught from the pulpit? Similarly, how important is it for us as individuals to prove other individuals wrong? It's a difficult question for me. As it turns out, the commonly held belief among the leadership of the Church for many, many years was that Joseph Smith instituted the priesthood ban, yet the earliest specific reference to that policy was offered by Brigham Young sometime in the 1850s (I think). It turns out they were wrong in their assumption, and that they supported a policy based at least partially on incorrect information. Does that invalidate them as men of God trying as hard as they can to do the right thing? I don't think it does. When President Kimball was considering the change in policy it turns out that he asked Brother McConkie to research the question of scriptural or revelatory basis for the policy banning blacks. Brother McConkie came back with the conclusion that there was no actual doctrinal basis for the policy--despite his own very strong opinions on the matter. He learned, he changed, and he supported President Kimball with vigor in his decision to move forward and change the policy. Though he had reservations about mixed race marriages as a social challenge, he fully supported the new policy. Their hearts had changed, and so the policy could also change. It's been argued that the reason for the ban was not because of any alleged premortal unrighteousness by blacks, but as a test for both blacks and whites to see how we would all treat each other within that context--and to see how we would all act when the policy was changed. That makes a lot of sense to me. A lot of people have a hard time with the fact that Church leaders are sometimes just plain wrong, and that fact tests their faith in very serious ways. But what good does it do us to condemn? We've learned better, so now the right answer is to move forward in the light of that new knowledge. I think we often feel betrayed because we trusted the source to be absolutely correct (or at least "most correct") on the subject. But even the GAs are learning. So maybe it's best to leave most issues alone, be they social or political ideas offered in books or talks. If nothing else Brother McConkie taught us to learn the truth of any principle for ourselves, and that even the GAs are not yet perfect in knowledge or works. It's why personal study is still pushed as a critical foundation of a personal testimony. Which is not to say we should mistrust the words of the General Authorities, but rather that we should always seek our own confirmation. So maybe the Church has neither responsibility nor right to issue apologies or statements of regret. But I still think the Church can provide correlated materials that do help explain the context, the facts, and the reasons that led to change. When used as part of a lesson plan on continuing revelation and the evolution of the Church that includes a direct discussion of both the polygamy issue and the priesthood ban. Studying the ways we have changed as a Church is just as important as studying the ways we've stayed the same--and discussing the differences and reasons for each. In the meantime, what I'd *really* like to see is a book published through DB that offers that context in clear terms. The fact is that John Lund's book _The Church and the Negro_ is still accepted by many as doctrine; I would like to see a new book that directly addresses the fallacies and misconceptions that book so eloquently perpetuated. Those ideas reflected the belief of one generation and informed the understanding of at least one more generation. As a new generation seeks wisdom from their fathers, those ideas can be passed on to yet another generation (my father in law lent me the book from his personal library). Part of the problem is that the core doctrinal assumption of Lund's book--that some people were born into black skin (aka, a cursed bloodline) as a consequence of premortal failure--existed only in order to justify the priesthood ban. Remove the ban, and the speculation on premortal righteousness has no purpose. Yet many hold to that doctrine despite it's vague foundations and (now) unclear need. It was a step on the path toward better knowledge; now that we have new knowledge I believe we should directly and clearly discard the less complete reasonings so they can no longer confuse. This can be done with a new book that has the power to inform and educate people in the safety of their private places. Given a few years to perpetuate, these new ideas become common in only a few years. When the official curriculum of the Church reflects that new understanding, a new generation now has a completely fresh foundation on which to develop an even greater understanding. It's through the foundational literature that we learn and change and grow. Some ideas are best offered through historical or doctrinal works; some through fiction or essay. Our struggle to learn more and better is just as important a part of our collective literature as the fact of change or the explication of new understanding. Many struggle to accept and integrate new ideas; fiction and essay have the power to dramatize that struggle and show people that's it's okay to struggle with change. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "jana" Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 05 Aug 2002 16:13:53 -0700 I like these books. They are fun to read and I love that the chracters pray when they have problems, go to church, etc. It's little bit sugary-sweet sometimes, but sometimes that's just what I'm in the mood for. Karon has the skill to tackle tough problems without resorting to contrived romance-novel formulas. I think it helps that her main character is a man rather than a woman. Jana Remy Irvine, CA -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 05 Aug 2002 17:03:31 -0700 My book group read the first in this series a couple of years ago when it first came out. I found it to be tedious and cliche--but maybe I ought to give it a second chance. I never read any of the others. I've had others tell me how much they enjoyed it, so maybe it was me and not the book. However, it's not that it was thin on plot that bothered me--I just finished Carol Shield's SMALL CEREMONIES and not much of anything happens in that book either, but Shield's writing is fresh. She uses language in a way that you've never heard before, that give you "a-ha" moments. I never experienced that in Jan Karon's AT HOME IN MITFORD. Anyone else read any of them? Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Major Productions Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 05 Aug 2002 18:18:04 -0500 > Anybody else out there care to address the Mitford=20 > books? I joined a ward book club that had just finished reading the first Mitford book. I thought, "Why not?" and picked up the first in the series. Then I hoovered through the rest of the series and thought: "I wish *I* had written these!" Have to admit I had a preconception about them: "Oh, Sister So-and-So thinks these are wonderful so I'm not expecting much." But they were warm and witty and moral and spiritually-based--and I ended up eating my words (instead of bon-bons--so that was a good thing, since my words are a lot lower in calories). No profound thoughts here--but I've read them, enjoyed them, and my "inner literary snob" was pleasantly surprised.... Robbin Major Sugar Land, TX "There is no equal." -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 05 Aug 2002 18:35:20 -0600 Tony Markham wrote: > Regarding Institutional Repentance and the 1978 Revelation, not only would I > love to see some lessons giving the history and some underscoring the > Church's new, proper, Christ-like attitude towards racial differences, I'd > also like to read the actual text of the revelation. The way I understand it, President Kimball came to a personal understanding and belief in the need to change the policy as the result of months of intense study and prayer. When he felt that the decision was right, he presented it to his counsellors and later to the Twelve, drafting the text of the declaration as they went. He then prayed with the Twelve for confirmation or denial of the text and their desire to change the policy, and they received a clear and undeniable witness of the Spirit that they should proceed. In other words, not a revelation of new doctrine from the mouth of the Lord (a la most of the D&C), but a confirmation of the desires of the leadership to change the policy of the Church (burning in the bosom). They studied it out in their hearts and minds and the Lord revealed the truth of their ideas to them with an outpouring of the Spirit (sort of like the massive witness of the Spirit at the Pentecost or the transfiguration of Brigham Young). The opinion is based partially on President Hinckley's comments, in an address given commemorating the restoration of the priesthood (published in the October 1988 Ensign as "Priesthood Restoration"). He said "No voice audible to our physical ears was heard. But the voice of the Spirit whispered with certainty into our minds and our very souls." FWIW. (You have to love those CDs that let you search for half-remembered quotes and find the references. I love technology!) > Frankly, I suspect the worst--that the Lord took the church leaders to the > woodshed and gave them such a thrashing--and nobody wants to publish that. > Of course this is pure speculation and it only arises in the absence of a > text that we can all read for ourselves. I would be happy to be wrong about > this. My inclination is that the Lord wouldn't have thrashed anyone because the Church was not in violation of prior revelation. They may have been in error, but I don't think they were operating against knowledge that they had already received. The situation called for education and the natural (gentle) rebuke that comes of new knowledge that puts our own past acts in a new context. No need for a thrashing or punishment. But in the absence of a clear text or other clear description of how the proclamation came about, I'm also speculating (certainly, President Hinckley's comments in the article mentioned above are at best vague on the details). I'm not sure why there has been so little information published about the general circumstances of the proclamation. It's yet one more reason why I wish someone with access to those documents and/or people would publish a book explaining those events more clearly. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 05 Aug 2002 20:00:36 -0600 ___ Scott ___ | When President Kimball was considering the change in policy it | turns out that he asked Brother McConkie to research the | question of scriptural or revelatory basis for the policy banning | blacks. Brother McConkie came back with the conclusion that | there was no actual doctrinal basis for the policy--despite his | own very strong opinions on the matter. ___ Interestingly Chauncey Riddle was apparently commissioned to do a lot of the research for the discussion. He said that he was given access to a lot of archives that normally are "off limits." (Exactly what that entailed, I'm not sure) He came to the conclusion from what he read that the policy was doctrine. He wasn't a racist, from what I could see from discussions with him back at BYU. I suspect though that he was giving authority to the views in Utah from 1860 - 1900 which perhaps Elder McConkie discounted. (Given the approach McConkie takes to Utah theology, this isn't surprising) However when the revelation came out it was quite the test to Riddle, according to his story. But then when he prayed about it he got the same revelation that it was right. The problem with theology is that pointing out what is or isn't a revelation isn't always that straightforward. Just because it is scripture doesn't mean it is revelation and vice versa. The difficulty with Nauvoo and early Utah theology makes this even more apparent. A lot was taught that we have only from secondary texts. Those texts might be corrupt (misunderstood doctrines) or simply misrecorded. There are dozens of examples of this. Yet it also seems like a lot of the early Utah theology had its origins in Nauvoo with Joseph Smith. That doesn't mean the *form* it took was the same as Joseph understood it. (As the debates between Pratt and Young illustrate) Further we don't have the sources for Joseph's understanding either, which makes everything somewhat second or third hand. I think that somehow we tie revelation with certainty and want some univocal text that is plain in such a way that we know everything. Such has never been the case with my own personal revelation. While I certainly feel that people like Brigham Young or Joseph Smith are orders of magnitude better at receiving and understanding revelation than I, I'm not sure that it differs in kind. It never is certainty in the sense of knowing all the details of what was revealed. Given that, I think that all those writings about blacks and the priesthood end up being a little more confusing than I think people on either side of the discussion sometimes wish to admit. The only thing I'm sure of in the matter is that the Lord ended it. I don't claim to know the original basis of things. I'm not certain we'll ever know. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kellene Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Carol Lynn PEARSON, _Day Old Child_ (Review) Date: 06 Aug 2002 00:17:20 -0600 I adore Carol Lynn Pearson's poetry and have (I think) every book she's written. The poems quoted here are ones I've read. Is there any new poetry in this book? Kellene R. Adams -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 06 Aug 2002 00:11:34 -0600 ---Original Message From: Thom Duncan > > As long as Mormonism continues to teach that Man has free > will, that man is ultimately responsible for his own choices, > how can that be un_postmodernist? How can God honor a > person's free will choice if, in making that choice, they > commit a horrible sin? If Free Agency means anything, it > means that my version of Mormonism as revealed to me by my > personal wrestlings with the Spirit is just as valid in the > long run as your version of Mormonism, or anybody else's for > that matter. Assuming that we are both indeed in tune with the Spirit, this is of course correct. The problem is that there are *some* doctrines that are much less flexible than others. Some of which will get you kicked out of LDS services and preclude you coming into the Celestial Kingdom. > An example of perfectly acceptable versions of Mormonism, > neither of which will get you in trouble. Let's say you pay > tithing on your gross income and I pay it on my net. > According to the Church Handbook of Instructions, either form > is considered acceptable tithing, and either form will not > prevent you from getting a temple recommend. No argument there. > And that's only one example of our very postmodern religion. > Seeing R-rated movies for instance will not prevent you from > getting a TR. There is no One-Size-Fits-All Mormonism. Such > creedism is what Joseph decried. It depends on what you mean as creedism. You are right that there is no One-Size-Fits-All, but there *are* some rules that are absolute and will absolutely result in your expulsion from membership. If the prophet tells you to do something, you'd better either do it, or have a reason that checks out with God not to. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 06 Aug 2002 02:49:04 -0600 I'm going to try to be less political in this one and avoid the whole conservative/liberal dichotomy. I agree with you, Clark, that the terms conservative and liberal have accreted too many different meanings (and thus ceased to some extent to be meaningful) and that makes those aspects of our discussion open to misinterpretation and misrepresentation. ---Original Message From: Clark Goble > > Really, the battle in academia is quite different than you > describe. One need only do a google search of conservatism > and postmodernism shows that most of the debate is liberal > postmodernists making apologetics of postmodernism so that > they *aren't* considered the same as Rush Limbaugh. If your > view of postmodernism in English departments is true, why > this odd discourse going on at the moment? > > The fact is that English departments were co-opted by > "political liberalism" decades before postmodernism was > discovered by the humanities. I'll become postmodernist: I think we're talking here of two different meanings of postmodernism being used interchangeably. There is a faddish postmodernism that is common in academia that is recognized by me, Erin O'Connor, and even James Faulconer. I've been labeling it political postmodernism, but I kind of like Faulconer's use of faddish postmodernism because that more closely identifies what I mean. This kind of postmodernism is mainly used to support a specific political ideology and it labels itself postmodernism as it chastises the benighted masses. This faddish postmodernism is over-facile, easily imitated, derogatory of history, unfriendly, and a form of cant at modern Universities. I greatly enjoyed the link you sent with the article by Faulconer. He is doing a great service by identifying and clarifying postmodernism as *he* practices it. I have no problem with his form of postmodernism. But clinging to the term 'postmodernism' when that term has been co-opted and corrupted by so many others with much broader support seems to me decidedly un-postmodern. A true, non-faddish postmodernism should *attempt* to be aware of the excessive meanings attached to 'postmodernism' (the meanings that stand outside of the term itself) and discuss the assumptions and corruption (or drift/change if you want to be less normative) of the original term. And they should ask themselves if postmodernism as a term is still useful for what they do given that postmodernism is a confusing term to start off with and that it has been successfully co-opted by relativists with a political agenda. > ___ Jacob ___ > | How, exactly, does postmodernism allow for a standard it doesn't > | simultaneously undermine? > ___ > > Existence. > > Repetition is untrustworthy but there is a given. We > encounter the world. That fact of encountering is absolute. > > Might I suggest you read through Jim Faulconer's essay on > postmodernism? He goes through a few of these issues. > > http://www.nd.edu/~rpotter/pomo.html > > I listed several major postmodernists who speak of this. > That you appear unfamiliar with these things which form the > rhetorical foundation of postmodernism make one question your > attacks on postmodernism. Are you really sure what > postmodernism is? I have an uncomfortable double definition of postmodernism originating from my experience in BYU's English department. There, my exposure to postmodernism had two forms. First, one professor tried to explain the idea of "other" and we read some Derrida and discussed (but did not read) Levinas. I like Derrida a lot and I think his ideas are fascinating and extremely useful in the hands of LDS people. I liked inquiries into perspective because it closely resembles the actual workings of gospel testimony. I had *some* reservations for the simple reason that Derrida's postmodernism works best with well-intentioned, honest discourse/questioning and I could see that a more malicious use was both possible and likely--there is nothing inherent in Derrida (that I could see) that prevents an effective relativism with someone willing to misrepresent/politicize perspective. And that's what I found in my second exposure to postmodernism under the hands of some feminist professors. In this form, it was okay to question Truth of certain perspectives, but not okay to question Truth of others. This doctrinaire postmodernism was distasteful to me. Since it was the *prevalent* form of postmodernism, I lost a great deal of respect for postmodernism in general. Since the vast majority of the time that I hear about postmodernism is this faddish form, I tend to assume that a discussion of postmodernism is based on this polarized inquiry. That is not an unreasonable assumption and, indeed, my reaction is a postmodernist one because I am questioning what Faulconer calls 'excessive' meaning and discussing those outside/other/excessive meanings. So am I really sure what postmodernism is? Not really. Are you? I would argue that neither of us should be sure what postmodernism is, that your definition is different from my own, and that mine is the prevalent and common use whereas yours is a more traditional one utilized by a few specialists. > If you are interested in the issue, I'd suggest looking at > Levinas' discussion of ethics as arising from the absolute > alterity of the other we encounter. Originally this was > discussed in the context of our encountering God, but came to > be viewed in terms of our encounter with any person as other. > (Other than who we are) Levinas has been a popular thinker > at BYU precisely because of how he explains the abolute > nature of God. It is a way that allows Mormonism to keep a > notion of the absolute without following the mistakes of > Hellenism, Scholasticism and Modernism. I didn't like what little I learned of Levinas mainly because I preferred Derrida. I don't remember why that was, it was 10 years ago and my disappointment with the drift in postmodernism makes me uninterested. If I recall correctly, I found Levinas too facile, too easy, and incomplete. > ___ Jacob ___ > | I'm not ignoring the debate--it just hasn't been any use to get in > | their ring and use their rules. It's become abundantly clear that > | entering a ring owned by your opponent with rules set by your opponent > | is a waste of time. > ___ > > In other words your complain has *nothing* to do with > postmodernism. It is simply the fact that liberals control > most of the humanity departments and don't like > conservatives. They don't play fair and so you are upset. > It has nothing to do with postmodernism at all but simply > office politics. Don't be so quick to trivialize me. This isn't simply office politics. It isn't me being upset that they don't play fair. And this has very much to do with postmodernism. This issue is important because we essentially force our young people to go to University and those Universities have core courses that have become indoctrination camps under the banner of postmodernism. Under the guise of teaching of 'perspective' and 'other', they are teaching intolerance, group identity, victimology, and segregation. Because a college degree is required for most well-paying careers, and those degrees are controlled by professionals intent on molding young minds into their own image, we are requiring a degree of indoctrination that is damaging to a society that supposedly values freedom of inquiry. And the reason this has to do with postmodernism is that the discipline is threatened with extinction if things continue on their present course. Postmodernism has already suffered irreparable semantic shift and lost the very terms of debate. Talk to 100 college students who have taken English or Philosophy courses what postmodernism is and see which definition you come up with. Better yet, look at the syllabus of 100 college courses that supposedly teach or are based on postmodernism. I'd be willing to bet that most of them don't take the pains that Faulconer seems to when he sets up a foundation of modernism. Too often, understanding of the past and 'modernism' (without which, postmodernism is without form or function) is nothing more than a strawman consisting of some nebulous conception of "European White Men" and has nothing to do with rationalism, certainty, and universalism. Most postmodernists have nothing to do with the "friendly skepticism" that is used to broaden discourse and have everything to do with antagonism and shutting down reasonable discourse altogether in favor of accepted, dogmatic interpretation. You can argue that this isn't really "postmodernism", but given the number of people calling it that your arguments aren't going to find a lot of purchase. > ___ Jacob ___ > | What matters is that I see people who cry "academic > freedom" to oppose > | *my* standards who are simultaneously willing to subvert "academic > | freedom" when supporting their own standards. > ___ > > Then why attack postmodernism? Why not just attack people > who are hypocrites? > > This is why this is my pet peeve. It seems like > "conservatives" (whatever that means) are upset at not > getting a fair shake and so start attacking something > unrelated. It doesn't make much sense. It is akin to those > suffering economic problems to find some racial group to > stereotype for their problems. Conservatives can't (or more > likely won't) battle the hegemony in the humanities and so > instead look for an academic whipping boy. It is a rather odd > phenomena. This is hardly the random witch-hunt you describe here. They call themselves postmodernists. The vast majority of others call them postmodernists. Why are you confused when I say I have problems with postmodernists? I even go out of my way to exempt from my disapprobation those who adhere to a different, antiquated definition of postmodernism. The label is useful to refer to the group. It wouldn't matter to me if they called themselves Left-Handed, Squint-Eyed Tailors. And an actual, truer definition of Left-Handed, Squint-Eyed Tailors wouldn't really matter then, either. Postmodernism, as the term is commonly used at U.S. Universities, is destroying English studies and operating as an un-checked indoctrination machine. I'm sorry that a favorite term of yours has been damaged in the process. But if you want to save the substance of postmodernism, then you'd do better to correct those calling themselves postmodernists--or give up a lost battle and call yourselves something more descriptive. If a thief hid behind you to avoid someone calling "Stop, Thief!", would you stand firm and insist that *you* aren't a thief, or would you turn and apprehend the one using you as a shield for their wrong-doing? Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: [AML] Who Makes Meaning? (was: Moderator on Postmodernism Etc.) Date: 05 Aug 2002 18:06:32 -0600 ___ Jonathan ___ | For now, I'd like to encourage people to keep on writing and | responding, but to try to shift the focus somewhat to | discussing the effect of postmodernism on literary | interpretation and the practice of literature. ___ This is probably a good point. I think I've said everything I have to say about the academics issue. So I'll bow out of that now. (If only because I don't think anyone has established that the problem is postmodernism - only that it is poor scholarship and hypocrisy. Those are important problems, but hardly unique to the past decade) Allow me to expand instead off of two recent posts by Thom and Susan. ___ Thom ___ | Actually, one cannot prove that God says anything, only that | one believes God said something. God can be used to | rationalize immoral behavior just as he can be used to teach | moral behavior. ___ Now Thom is taking what might be termed the skeptical approach. Without quoting his full post, he is adopting an approach to literature that probably is closer to what Richard Rorty teaches. We can never "prove" (in the sense of certainty) what the origin of a text is. Note how he focuses in on the *uses* of the text. A text can be *used* to do anything. In other words *we* are the master of the text, not the author. Rather than focusing in on the implications Thom brings to this, let me quote Susan making a somewhat similar comment. ___ Susan ___ | ...when he was a kid his father took him driving in a fancy | Cadillac, blaring Derek and the Dominos (one of Eric Clapton's | early bands), a song called "Why Does Love Got To Be So Sad?" | He shared how his father took that opportunity to explain to | him why love doesn't have to be sad--and tied it in to temple | marriage. ___ Notice how Susan is also talking about use, although in a fashion that doesn't quite place the role of the author in the state of skepticism that Thom does. Susan doesn't deny the "normal" role of the author, but notes how a listener can change the meaning of the text. In this case the meaning changes in a rather abrupt way. This is what we might call the place of "margins" in reading a text. By that I mean that the comments of the father are a kind of marginal writing that we still see when reading the text. The metaphor comes from what many of you may have seen in college. You check a book out from the library and there are all these little "scraws" on the margins that comment on the text. This is actually a tradition from history. Those of you who have seen the Talmud are familiar with how it consists of writings in the margins around the text of the Torah (Bible). This marginal writing obviously affects the *how* of scriptures. The following is a page of the Talmud which includes a discussion of how this marginal writing relates to the text as a kind of community: http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/3.1/coverweb/porush/contra4.html Now what is interesting to me is how this effect of margin writing changes literature. Clearly the commentaries we are familiar with affects how we read a text. This is why, for instance, a Mormon reading the Bible and a non-Mormon reading the Bible will often have very different readings. What I think Susan's example brings out (in opposition to Thom's) is the fact that this ability of reading texts imposes upon us an absolute sense of responsibility. The responsibility of meaning is on our shoulders. Note how the father in Susan's example takes this responsibility and changes the meaning of the text (Clapton's song) so that it affects the son in a positive fashion. This is, in a very real sense, a form of deconstruction. The Father has deconstructed the meaning of "love is sad" which the song makes use of. He does this not only in terms of its function in the song but in terms of its function as the song functions. By bringing those issues to the forefront, the function of the song functions. It changed from being background noise or even the assertion that love is sad into a fuller sense of what love is. This deconstruction was a kind of interrogating the text and what made the text possible. Further when that son hears the song again, that prior discussion with his father will be in the "margins" just as the writings of the Talmudic authors are in the margins of the Torah. Now Thom is quite right that this marginal writing can be taken for both good or evil. Notice how Satan uses this method to "contaminate" the meaning of things. The corruption of sexuality is a perfect example. Most Mormons would say that sexuality is inherently good. Yet the *meaning* changes because of all those marginal writings that Satan gives us through advertising, movies, magazines and so forth. What was once sacred becomes profane. Yet what Susan brings out is how this profane can take on the effects of the sacred. What is the ultimate "margin" writer? The Holy Ghost. That still small voice is the writing of God on the margins of all texts. My mother liked to tell this story of being in a class where she felt many things were wrong but that the Holy Ghost told her the correct version of. (I'll skip the details of the story - I suspect many of us have had similar experiences) What the Holy Ghost is doing is deconstructing the text. Breaking it down to its fundamentals and then rebuilding it with those fundamentals and their problems highlighted. The meaning changes. A *deeper* knowledge ensues. Not only does the HG rework the text, but it reworks what it means to read the text. Consider Elder Oak's very postmodern view of scripture. He asked what meaning of James 1:5 was more important. The one that James or his 1st century audience would have understood, or the meaning that prompted Joseph to go to the grove and receive the first vision? In the same way, as we read the texts by the spirit the Holy Ghost deconstructs them to prod us on to action. I have some more thoughts on this, but all me just this for now. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 06 Aug 2002 09:22:24 -0400 I read them, sort of, some time ago. I enjoyed the first couple books, got lost in the middle, and then picked up one of the later ones. In general, I like them. I thought the characters were fairly believable. But, over the series, the story seemed to drag along. Tracie Laulusa -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] LDS Nominated for Chesley Awards Date: 06 Aug 2002 09:09:38 -0500 >From Science Fiction News of the Week (http://www.scifi.com/sfw/current/news.html): Organizers have announced the nominees for the 17th annual ASFA Chesley Awards, named for astronomical artist Chesley Bonestell and recognizing excellence in fantastic and science fiction art in the year 2001. The Association of Science Fiction and Fantasy Artists also presents the awards to people and organizations that have made outstanding contributions to ASFA and the science fiction and fantasy art community as a whole. The awards will be presented at this year's WorldCon, also known as ConJose, which takes place in San Jose, Calif., on Labor Day weekend. ASFA is an international organization of professional and amateur artists, art directors, publishing professionals, collectors and enthusiasts. In the category "Best Cover Illustration: Magazine", Latter-day Saint painter and BYU professor James C. Christensen has been nominated for his cover for _The Leading Edge_ No. 41, April '01. Christensen is the illustrator and co-author of the book _Voyage of the Beagle_, which was adapted to the odd and highly-underrated TV miniseries _Voyage of the Beagle_, starring Beau Bridges (2000). Also nominated in this same category is illustrator Jael (also a Mormon, I believe), for her cover for _Science Fiction Chronicle_, July '01. Jael is also nominated in the category "Best Color Work: Unpublished". Christensen is also nominated in the category "Best Product Illustration" for "Faery Tales" (fine art print for The Greenwich Workshop) Preston -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: [AML] ANDERSON, _Recollections of Private Seth Jackson_ in Bookstores Date: 06 Aug 2002 08:44:28 -0600 It has taken awhile (it's been more than a year since I first went to = press with this book), but I got a notice in the mail over the week end = from Granite Publishing and Distribution. They said in April 44 copies = of my book, The Recollections of Private Seth Jackson, Mormon Battlion, = Company D, were sold to bookstores. These bookstores were: Timp Missionary Generations LDS Whipple's Book Carr Stationary Bell's Family Book Barn Times and Seasons Sam Weller's Ensign Books Journal Bookstore Franz Beehive Shevells Words of Wisdom Beehive Bookstore Keystone Books. This book is also going to be introduced at the LDS Booksellers = Convention later this month. Granite will be passing out free copies of = the book. Get it while the price is right. Paris Anderson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 06 Aug 2002 10:44:05 -0600 Funny that my reaction is exactly Jeff's. I've tried it TWICE. And can't get interested. She says she writes so that those whose lives are awful can LIVE with pleasant people and circumstances. I guess my life is so pleasant that I like to investigate literature that shows me those whose lives are awful. (!) Has anyone read EMPIRE FALLS, (the very end is especially good) or DROWNING RUTH (though the writing is uneven, the mystery of it grips you until the end)? Right now I'm on PEACE LIKE A RIVER, determined to make it to the end, although I find some flaws in it, too. These books are making thousands of dollars for their authors. And they are not perfect and probably not classics. Well, more power to them anyway! Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: RE: [AML] Irreantum Cutbacks Date: 06 Aug 2002 11:23:40 -0600 I wonder if 100 pages of text is a big daunting to some people. Maybe cutting back will actually increase subscriptions. Just a thought. Here's hoping, anyway. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Chaim Potok Dies Date: 06 Aug 2002 11:33:28 -0600 I absolutely agree with everyone who has written about Chaim Potok, and = share with you all my deep affection and admiration for his work as a = writer, both his fiction and his non-fiction. His History of the Jews is = a masterpiece. And I quite agree that he is a fine role model for those = of us who would like to write fiction that explores Mormon culture as = thoroughly as Potok explored Jewish culture. But let's not forget one salient fact: Potok was outcast from the orthodox = Jewish community because of what he wrote. That was the price he paid, = and it was for him a deeply painful one. I certainly hope that a Mormon = Chaim Potok would not be excommunicated. But Potok, essentially, was = excommunicated. A very sobering thought. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 06 Aug 2002 12:00:02 -0600 Me, a couple weeks ago: >> Demonstrably false. A great many governmental programs to >> alleviate poverty are quite successful, provided that they >> are adequately funded and intelligently administered. >If it's demonstrably false, then you're gonna have to demonstrate. =20 Jacob threw down this particular gauntlet, and then, poor man, had to wait = while his opponent skulked off to Disneyland. (Actually, we went to = Northern California, so it was Paramount's Great America, but same diff.) = Still, there that ol' gauntlet is, laying there on the ground. May I = please beg the indulgence of our esteemed moderator, and offer a response = to Jacob's challenge? =20 When we think of 'government welfare,' most people focus on just a few, = controversial programs: ADC (Aid to Dependent Children) and food stamps = probably top the list. Those programs have been both attacked and = defended,and attacking or defending them may be the most significant = difference between the political right and left. I believe that some of = those programs have been successful and can be defended, but they're not = quite what I have in mind; they're not clearly, obviously successful. Far more successful would be some of the following (and I'm only going to = describe a few): Rural Electrification, the REA and the TVA and similar programs. One = positive role of government is to do large-scale jobs that benefit the = public but that are either insufficiently profitable for private industry, = or, if tackled by private industry, would tend to lead to the formation of = monopolies. Both were true for rural electrification. Private industry = had no incentive to extend power lines to the most difficult to reach = rural backwaters, and those industries which controlled power tended to = become monopolies, unresponsive to citizen needs and prohibitively = expensive. But the TVA and REA absolutely changed the lives of the rural = poor in the middle third of the last century, allowing the poor to feed = themselves far more efficiently than before, and making possible upward = mobility. And yes, these were always described and defended as anti-povert= y 'welfare' programs. Headstart and school lunch programs. =20 The biggest positive impact government can make in the lives of the poor = has to do with extending educational opportunities and benefits. Many = poor families cannot afford pre-school for their children. Headstart = gives their children a fighting chance. Many poor families cannot afford = to buy or send a lunch with their kids. School lunch programs also make = it possible for kids to learn in the afternoons without nagging hunger = pains. I'd also add before and after school programs for the families of = the working poor. These are all funded by and provided by the government, = and they all constitute 'welfare' though they aren't thought of as such. Pell grants, GSL's and other student loan programs. =20 Look at the explosion of public colleges and universities after WWII, and = look at the many programs that make it possible for impoverished people to = attend an institution of higher learning. Loans and grants and scholarship= s, all established by, funded by and underwritten by the governement. In = the nineteeth century, very few people attend college. Now most young = people do, and that's the path to upward mobility. Those are 'welfare' = programs, programs that are intended to assist the poor. They work = spectacularly well. Sure there are private colleges and universities, = most with tuition costs at least four times what public universities cost. = =20 FHA, Fannie Mae, and other housing loan programs. Some programs intended to provide public housing are catastrophic = failures, no question about it. But banks don't lend money to people = without collateral. So how is a poor, hard working family supposed to buy = a home? Well, the government can step in and guarantee the loan. Again, = not thought of as an anti-poverty program, but it is, providing families = with the first step towards housing independence. Civil rights laws and enforcement agencies: Again, we may not think of civil rights programs as 'welfare,' but they = are. Programs outlawing discrimination in hiring, for example, ended = centuries of poverty in some black families in a single generation, and = that's what they were intended to do. =20 The GI Bill, and VA. Look at the history of our nation, and particularly, the history of the = treatment of returning veterans. Until after WWII, really, they got = shafted, and many if not most civil war veterans spent the rest of their = days in abject poverty. We don't think of the GI bill as 'welfare' but it = is, maybe the most successful anti-proverty program ever. When I was in = high school, I dated a girl from a very poor family. Sally (not her name) = lived in public housing, ate using food stamps, and had no advantages at = all. Her mother had four children by four different men, and serious = alcohol problems. I liked her mom a lot, actually, though she was a very = messed up woman, and she told me one time the secret to parenting in the = projects. "Keep the girls from getting pregnant and the boys out of jail = until they're eighteen. Then they can join the army, and they'll be all = right." Kathy turned eighteen, joined the army, used the GI bill to = finish her education, and is today a high school principal in Texas. =20 I could name a hundred more brilliantly successful government programs = that alleviate poverty. Some are controversial, like labor laws. I'm = very pro-union; some people aren't, so I usually don't like to list them. = But for my grandfather, the steel workers union is the single biggest = reason he was able to rise from poverty. =20 >In a lot of cases, the poor *are* to blame for their poverty. Being shy >to say that is a part of what keeps people poor. Not that there isn't >enough blame to go around--government programs, capitalists, >businesses, >and neighbors can all play supporting roles in keeping people down. Interesting, since King Benjamin absolutely prohibits our saying that the = poor are to blame for their poverty. >Now, I'd be interested in the people of your old ward and how you'd >define poverty. What constitutes "next to impossible"? And who are >the >poor?=20 I define poor as people who go to bed hungry on a fairly regular basis. = =20 > I suspect that our definitions of poor are out of sync. For >example, I don't put any stock into comparative income evaluations >which >are a big part of claims that "the poor are getting poorer" (which I >consider bunk). =20 I don't put much stock in 'em either. I think the government poverty = index is fatally flawed, in that it indexes poverty to food costs, not = housing costs. I think there are far more poor people in America than = official government statistics suggest, and that they're getting a lot = poorer a lot faster than we currently suspect. >I'd be willing to bet that when you talk about "the >poor" you aren't referring to the same folks I am when I talk about "the >poor". Beats me. What do you call 'poor people?' I mean, the poorest bloke in = America is probably richer than the richest bloke in Papua New Guinea. = These things are relative. Some things are obvious; drug and alcohol addictions obviously hold a lot = of folks back. If there's a single demonstrable failure among all = government programs for the poor, it would be current drug laws, which = provide for absurdly draconion penalties for minor drug offenses, ruining = the lives of thousands of young people who, because of a single mistake, = become career criminals. But aside from that, I would say two things hold = folks back, make it impossible for the working poor to escape poverty: = chld care, and housing expenses. Those two expenses just eat people up. = I've seen it hundred times, people (usually women, sometimes single women, = but not always) work long hours with great diligence, but can't get ahead = for a second, because of the difficulty finding decent child care or = decent housing. A third huge expense is medical; you can survive for = awhile without health insurance, but every day you're rolling the dice. = So then one day, you roll your ankle, and suddenly any progress you've = made is lost. =20 =20 I'd suggest some further reading. A great book on welfare is a recent = one, LynNell Hancock's Hands to Work. Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickel and = Dimed is terrific. There are any number of far more scholarly works, the = titles of which I can't remember right now. =20 >Following the Church welfare program means not accepting government >aid. >You can't have them "in conjunction" within the policy of Church >welfare. Exceptions might be made, but I haven't heard of them and >would be surprised if they passed "official" muster. Not so. The bishop's handbook is filled with programs that he can = recommend to struggling families. Seriously, bishops can't counsel = families to send their kids to Headstart, or to apply for an FHA loan? = Nonsense. Again, you're equating 'welfare' with 'ADC'. =20 >Since all King Benjamin's examples were personal and his address was >personal I think an assumption of personal (as opposed to >governmental) >responsibility towards the poor is warranted. =20 How can you possibly say this? He's the king. L'etat c'est moi. He's = the head of the executive branch of government. He's probably also the = entire legislative branch. He's probably also a one man judicial branch. = He's the government. Look, I like Jacob, and I think he's a friend, and our differences on = these questions are, I hope, the differences of friends. But as Mormon = culture has become increasingly conservative, so have conservative ideas = begun to permeate our culture. This is not a bad thing. But it becomes a = very bad thing when we begin to conflate our own personal political = agendas with the culture itself, or, heaven forfend, the gospel. And = that, frankly, is an interesting subject for writers, especially writers = who have a political bent. What is the relationship between culture and = Truth? What is the relationship between conservatism and Mormonism? As a = writer, I'm interested in the interstices of those relationships. =20 Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: daryoung@juno.com Subject: [AML] Re: Education Week Get-Together Date: 06 Aug 2002 18:05:10 GMT Alrighty, Folks, votes are in: the official date of the AML unofficial dinner out is now Thursday, August 22. Thanks to everyone who responded. Now, I'd like to ask you to respond just one more time so that I can get a general count. Even if you've already e-mailed me, please drop me a line and mention whether you will be bringing a date. Also, I got paltry few suggestions for an eating establishment. Please, please, if you're familiar with the Provo/Orem area, could you suggest something? I'm leaning more towards Orem so that we can escape the Ed. Week crowds, but make a suggestion. (We've had Thai and Mexican at our last two dinners out. How 'bout something new?) I apologize to those who wanted to come but can't on Thursday. It was the most popular date among those who expressed opinions. Thanks. -Darlene Young ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Irreantum Cutbacks Date: 06 Aug 2002 10:38:37 -0600 I don't mind not having it perfect bound! Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Utopias Date: 06 Aug 2002 12:05:38 -0600 One final salvo: >In the eighties when taxes went down charitable giving rose much >more sharply than ever before. =20 Sure. Makes for a nice tax deduction. Private charitable giving is = subsidized by the government. It is, in short, a government program. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 06 Aug 2002 12:10:18 -0600 >With all due respect to the idea of music being neutral--hogwash. >Who hasn't seen a baby calm down with a soothing lullaby? Hasn't = >everyone >heard a particularly jammin' song and couldn't help but tap their feet = >when >it came on the radio?=20 I mean, it's all morally neutral. Of course music is effective; that's = why we like it so much. That's why we love it. Different sorts of sounds = evoke different emotions. I just think all those emotions are morally = neutral, and that's why they'd better be spiritually neutral. Otherwise = we'd only be able to feel the Spirit when we felt certain emotions, = whereas we need the Spirit during all emotional states. =20 Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Unsavory Etymologies Date: 06 Aug 2002 12:24:13 -0600 On the swearing thread. I think the F word isn't a swear word anymore. It's become casual = conversational. =20 Certainly this is true with students. I teach at BYU, but when I leave = Provo and go to other universities, it certainly is the case. F is sort = of an all-purpose modifier anymore. It just isn't offensive for a very = large segment of the population. Of course it's still tremendously offensive in other social circles, not = limited to LDS ones. I do cuss sometimes, and rather like the versatility = of F, but of course won't use it in my ward. Still, I think the evolution = of this word is very very interesting. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Box Office Report Aug. 2 Date: 06 Aug 2002 14:03:41 -0500 Feature Films by LDS/Mormon Filmmakers and Actors Weekend Box Office Report (U.S. Domestic Box Office Gross) Weekend of August 2, 2002 Report compiled by: LDSFilm.com [If table below doesn't line up properly, try looking at them with a mono-spaced font, such as Courier - Ed.] Natl Film Title Weekend Gross Rank LDS/Mormon Filmmaker/Actor Total Gross Theaters Days --- ----------------------------- ----------- ----- ---- 3 Master of Disguise 12,554,650 2,565 3 Perry Andelin Blake (director) 12,554,650 12 Minority Report 1,727,031 1,139 45 Gerald Molen (producer) 126,618,621 26 The Divine Secrets of the 232,061 244 59 Ya-Ya Sisterhood 68,232,522 36 ESPN's Ultimate X 72,358 38 87 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 3,603,833 60 Cirque du Soleil: Journey of Man 25,432 8 822 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,683,304 70 The Singles Ward 13,928 8 185 Kurt Hale (writer/director) 893,957 John E. Moyer (writer) Dave Hunter (producer) Cody Hale (composer) Ryan Little (cinematographer) Actors: Will Swenson, Connie Young, Daryn Tufts, Kirby Heyborne, Michael Birkeland, Robert Swenson, Wally Joyner, Lincoln Hoppe, Gretchen Whalley, Sedra Santos, etc. 67 China: The Panda Adventure 15,104 6 374 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 2,698,361 75 Galapagos 8,855 3 1011 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,672,053 81 The Other Side of Heaven 5,854 6 234 Mitch Davis (writer/director) 4,670,516 John H. Groberg (author/character) Gerald Molen, John Garbett (producers) 103 Mark Twain's America 3D 1,347 1 1494 Alan Williams (composer) 2,257,566 106 The Believer 1,193 1 80 Ryan Gosling (lead actor) 255,061 CALL FOR ENTRIES: The Eclipse Film Festival in St. George, Utah (http://www.eclipsefilmfest.com/) is a very friendly venue for Utah-made, Latter-day Saint-made, and quality family-friendly films. The festival currently has a call for entries posted, and its founders are looking forward to hearing from some of you. AUGUST is an unusually big month for movie releases by Latter-day Saint directors. Starting things off, feature film production designer Perry Andelin Blake marked his directorial debut with "Master of Disguise" written by and starring "Saturday Night Live" alum Dana Carvey. The movie opened in the #1 spot nationwide, behind the much anticipated debut of M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs" starring Mel Gibson and the 2nd week of "Austin Powers in Goldmember" (produced by Moab, Utah native Eric McLeod). Blake's "Master of Disguise" took in $12.5 million over the weekend. The critical response was... well, let's call it "unanimous." On the bright side, critics generally singled out Carvey for criticism, and left Blake alone. A number of them said that the movie's production design was quite good -- not surprising for a movie directed by a very talented and experienced production designer. We're just ten days away from August 16th, the debut of Neil LaBute's LONG-awaited "Possession," starring fellow BYU graduate Aaron Eckhart and Academy Award-winning actress Gwyneth Paltrow. Mark Swan's equally LONG-awaited animated feature "The Princess and the Pea" will have a Salt Lake screening that same day. Blair Treu's "Little Secrets" (from Samuel Goldwyn Films) is having a by-inviation preview screening in Utah on August 14th, and then opens nationwide August 23rd. Finally, August wraps up with the August 30th wider release of producer Cary Derbidge and Ryan Little's feature film "Out of Step," featuring Alison Akin Clark as a Latter-day Saint dance student in love with a non-LDS musician played by Jeremy Elliott, while pursued by a Latter-day Saint film student played by Michael Buster. Also, Chris Heimerdinger's documentary "Lehi's Land of First Inheritance" and Christian Vuissa's award winning short film "Roots and Wings" are scheduled to hit stores in August. Then in September, "Jack Weyland's Charly" and "Day of Defense" will premiere. THE R.M. WRAPS: Kurt Hale wrapped production last week on the Latter-day Saint-themed comedy "The R.M." Excellent newspaper articles appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/08062002/tuesday/759341.htm), Deseret News (http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,405021210,00.html?), and Daily Universe (http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/39407). Cameos in the movie include Olympic gold medalist Rulon Gardner, Utah broadcaster Ruth Todd, and business mogul/JAZZ owner Larry H. Miller. Pop singer Maren Ord has been heard in a number of films (including "Thomas and the Magic Railroad", 2000), but makes her onscreen feature film debut in a supporting role as the R.M.'s little sister. In other HaleStorm Entertainment news, Kurt Hale's debut feature film, "The Singles Ward" reached a total box office gross of $893,957 this week, and is set to pass "Brigham City" next week to become the 3rd-highest grossing "LDS Cinema" film, after Davis' "The Other Side of Heaven" ($4.7 million box office) and Dutcher's "God's Army" ($2.6 million box office). HaleStorm's "Singles Ward" (with a production budget of about $425,000) already has the 2nd best box office to production budget ratio in the niche, after "God's Army" ($300,000 budget). (This is a good place to remind readers that "box office receipts" DO NOT equal "profits." Theaters and distributors take in a significant portion of box office receipts. A film whose production and advertising budget is matched by box office receipts is not yet profitable to investors -- a movie may need to take in 3 to 4 times the production budget in order to turn a profit. On the other hand, box office receipts are not the only revenue stream for movie. Video/DVD sales and rentals, as well as television rights, often make the difference between profitability and loss for a movie. Many movies also profit from licensing deals. But don't expect to see "Singles Ward" action figures any time soon.) T.C. CHRISTENSEN is currently in production on "A Pioneer Miracle", a short film about Latter-day Saint pioneers. Christensen is one of the most accomplished and prolific cinematographers in Latter-day Saint film history. He has been the D.P. on numerous Church videos and films, IMAX films, Feature Films For Families videos, and other projects. He was recently the co-director of the new Church-produced film "The First Vision," and the Kirtland Visitors Center film, both of which will debut at Church historic site visitor's centers in early 2003. TROY THROUGH A WINDOW is feature-length documentary recently completed by Brad Barber. The film should debut some time soon on television or in a film festival. Barber describes his film: "For his last film at school, Brad Barber decided to go home to Tennessee for Christmas break to try to answer some questions. He wanted to come to terms with the event that forever changed his Mormon family seven years earlier--when his idolized oldest brother announced he was gay. Since Troy came out, it seems as if a window now stands between him and the rest of family--making two distinct places which each side may see but can't always share. For Brad, interviewing his own family raised new issues to be addressed--How far can each side go to reach through the window and show acceptance to each other? The result is a challenging, emotional, and redeeming look at the effects of this complex, seldom talked about issue in his family." JAMES C. CHRISTENSEN RECEIVES CHESLEY NOM: [From Science Fiction News of the Week, http://www.scifi.com/sfw/current/news.html] Organizers have announced the nominees for the 17th annual ASFA Chesley Awards, named for astronomical artist Chesley Bonestell and recognizing excellence in fantastic and science fiction art in the year 2001. The Association of Science Fiction and Fantasy Artists also presents the awards to people and organizations that have made outstanding contributions to ASFA and the science fiction and fantasy art community as a whole. The awards will be presented at this year's WorldCon, also known as ConJose, which takes place in San Jose, Calif., on Labor Day weekend. ASFA is an international organization of professional and amateur artists, art directors, publishing professionals, collectors and enthusiasts. In the category "Best Cover Illustration: Magazine", Latter-day Saint painter and BYU professor James C. Christensen has been nominated for his cover for _The Leading Edge_ No. 41, April '01. Christensen is the illustrator and co-author of the book _Voyage of the Beagle_, which was adapted to the odd and highly-underrated TV miniseries _Voyage of the Beagle_, starring Beau Bridges (2000). Also nominated in this same category is illustrator Jael (also a Mormon, I believe), for her cover for _Science Fiction Chronicle_, July '01. Jael is also nominated in the category "Best Color Work: Unpublished". Christensen is also nominated in the category "Best Product Illustration" for "Faery Tales" (fine art print for The Greenwich Workshop) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 06 Aug 2002 13:10:14 -0700 Scott Parkin wrote: > snip A lot of people have a hard time with the fact that Church leaders are sometimes just plain wrong, and that fact tests their faith in very serious ways. But what good does it do us to condemn? We've learned better, so now the right answer is to move forward in the light of that new knowledge. > snip Amen to that! It is my understanding that humanity, and that includes the church, because when you really think about it, the church includes all people (we are all God's children) are here on earth 1.) to be tested; 2.) to be taught; 3.) to learn right from wrong and to work out our own salvation so that somewhere in the eternities to follow this mortal probation, we may become perfect. Only one was perfect here on earth and He made it possible for the rest of us to avoid justice and embrace mercy. If none are perfect, then it stands to reason the church is not yet perfect, only He who stands at the head, and whom we follow is perfect. That leader and head being Christ. So, . . . we have made mistakes, and will continue to make mistakes. This is part of progression. The only shame in a mistakes which leads to temporary failure is to let that shame and failure prevent us from learning from it and moving forward. We cannot be punished for the sins and or mistakes of our fathers, and dwelling on those mistakes and failures only holds our progress back. We need to take what truth we have today and move forward with it instead of pointing fingers back at the mistakes and errors of the past. Let's just get over it and move forward. Our prophets aren't always perfect, and we don't always understand perfectly what they have to share with us, which comes from God. Our prophets are the best source of truth we have other than our own limited access to the spirit of the Holy Ghost. All we can do is do our best, and trust in God's plan. No matter what the final outcome His plan will succeed, and it will be the perfect solution to the dilemma of mortality. He will succeed in bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind. Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "jana" Subject: Re: [AML] Carol Lynn PEARSON, _Day Old Child_ (Review) Date: 06 Aug 2002 21:56:17 -0700 The Pearson review was written by a non-AML-List-member so she can't answer your query. I don't have the book in hand right now, but if I recall correctly, it is an anthology of previously published poetry. If you're a big Pearson fan you should take a look at her series of gift books from Gibbs-Smith. She also recently co-authored a book with her daughter called _Fuzzy Red Bathrobe_. Jana Remy ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 11:17 PM > I adore Carol Lynn Pearson's poetry and have (I think) every book she's > written. The poems quoted here are ones I've read. Is there any new poetry > in this book? > > Kellene R. Adams > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gordon Ryan" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 07 Aug 2002 16:54:23 +1200 Regarding Scott Parkin's treatise: "Maybe we have to decide most of this stuff for ourselves, and it's to our ultimate good to be forced to research and pray on our own rather than await an orthodox institutional pronouncement." This single statement perhaps encapsulates best my appreciation of the need for, and support of, personal revelation. As opposed to the various churches available where one can "shop around" for the pastor who offers an interpretation closest to what we are seeking, LDS can, after a period of study and meditation, come to a pretty good understanding of the "doctrine" surrounding any particular issue. Yet, free agency provides the medium whereby we can accept, or reject, that premise. Failproof? Of course not. But it leaves room for progression, as Scott also points out, including growth by the GA's. Gordon Ryan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gordon Ryan" Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 07 Aug 2002 16:58:34 +1200 Barbara wrote: why is everyone afraid any book with Mormons in it will be pushy? Like Amway, we have a reputation! Not certain, Barbara, but when I wrote the first volume of Spirit of Union: Destiny, I wondered if Deseret Book would accept a "good" Catholic character and a "bad" Mormon character. I did! So did they! Still, the "Amway" rep persists, doesn't it? Gordon Ryan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gordon Ryan" Subject: Re: [AML] Unsavory Etymologies Date: 07 Aug 2002 17:25:01 +1200 [MOD: Welcome to the joys of AML-List, Gordon!] Eric wrote: "I think the F word isn't a swear word anymore. It's become casual conversational." Upon first subscribing to the AML list a couple of weeks ago, I was quite astonished to see the continuing thread regarding this particular word. Literature? Well, frequently used to punctuate literature, but value? Then I recalled something I had read fairly recently in researching for a particular military scene I was inserting into one of my manuscripts. And I thought back to when I first joined the Marine Corps, roughly three months AFTER joining the Church, (1962) What a combination! An LDS Marine! Anyway, the statement I read, in "Semper Fidelis: The History of The United States Marine Corps," does the word justice I think. The author, a reserve Marine Colonel and University professor states: "Always there was the word. Always there was that four-letter ugly sound that men in uniform have expanded into the single substance of the linguistic world. It was a handle, a hyphen, a hyperbole; verb, noun, modifier . . . It described food, fatigue, metaphysics. It stood for everything and meant nothing; an insulting word, it was never used to insult; crudely descriptive of the sexual act, it was never used to describe it . . . one could only surmise that if a visitor unacquainted with English were to overhear our conversations he would, in the way of Higher Criticism, demonstrate . . . that this little word must assuredly be the thing for which we were fighting." Fortunately, I learned much more from the Corps than this particular "modifier." But for a new member of the Church (who, during Basic Training one Sunday attended a Reorganized Church service, not knowing the difference) it was tough to learn a new jargon and exclude the primary additive. But forty years is a long time ago. I doubt the Corps has changed, despite electronic transmission of "the word." Gordon Ryan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gordon Ryan" Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 07 Aug 2002 17:30:13 +1200 Marilyn wrote: "These books are making thousands of dollars for their authors. And they are not perfect and probably not classics. Well, more power to them anyway! Marilyn Brown" Marilyn, are we circling back to "good books that go bust, and bad books that break the bank?" I haven't learned a lot in the eight years I've been writing, but I HAVE learned that there is no relationship between the two. BTW, I enjoyed Statehood half a dozen years ago! Gordon Ryan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: [AML] R-Rated Movie Quotes Date: 06 Aug 2002 22:46:02 -0600 [MOD: Okay to send it to AML-List, and I guess (gulp) that I'm willing to accept whatever appropriate discussion it may prompt.] Someone a while back mentioned a list they had compiled of general authority references to R-rated movies. I wonder if he or she might send it my way, or post it to the list, whichever seems more appropriate. I am trying to put together a form letter to send to people who write me asking, "How does an LDS film critic like yourself justify reviewing R-rated movies?" The short answer, of course, is, "None of your business." But I like to be more thorough than that when I can. Thanks, Eric D. Snider -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 06 Aug 2002 23:39:25 -0600 [MOD: I think Clark raises some interesting questions here about how literary analysis is conducted, potential problems with literary analysis for the believing Mormon, and how content from other fields is/ought/ought not to be used in literary analysis. I'd like to see some of these broader questions discussed, including the experience of others who have inhabited literature departments. (I note, with no disrespect intended, that neither Clark nor Jacob has actually taught in a literature department, nor even I think completed an advanced program.) Come on, all you List members from English et al.; what think ye of all this?] I don't want to say too much, because I think most of my responses would simply be re-iterating what I've already said. There were two small points I wanted to address before dropping the topic though. ___ Jacob ___ | I'll become postmodernist: I think we're talking here of two | different meanings of postmodernism being used interchangeably. ___ Well, we may be equivocating (which isn't really postmodern). However the problem is once again that this second sense of postmodernism is nothing more than "bad scholarship." However *exactly* the same phenomena occurred prior to the popularity of postmodernism in English departments and the humanity. Read a lot of the feminist criticism, or New Criticism, or Mythic Criticism. Most of it is facile, faddish and easy to "fake." The problem isn't postmodernism (of whatever sense of the term). The problem is that English departments tend to do poor scholarship and that the departments are run according popularity contests. That's what I was trying to bring out by pointing out that what these departments are doing now is simply what they did from the 1950's-1970's only with a new name. A couple of days ago I made the point that I think this occurs because of the claim of a literary truth. I'll not repeat that, but I think the problem isn't this faux postmodernism but the humanities in general. That may come off as elitist. But I feel that pretty strongly. To me those silly battles in the BYU English department in the early 90's are really a manifestation of the same thing. I love literature, but I honestly wonder how anyone could handle making that their major. Which is a variation of a question that was raised here a few months ago. How does Mormonism affect how you read literature? I suppose this is just the question of whether literature in academia conflicts with Mormonism. I know that biology has traditionally got the big questions because of Evolution. However it seems to me that English departments and perhaps sociology are the ones with the biggest conflicts. ___ Jacob ___ | Talk to 100 college students who have taken English or | Philosophy courses what postmodernism is and see | which definition you come up with. ___ I think philosophy students would have a much better idea of what it is since they are required to read postmodern authors carefully. (i.e. Heidegger, Derrida, Rorty, etc.) Perhaps someone who has only taken introduction to philosophy. . . ___ Jacob ___ | Better yet, look at the syllabus of 100 college courses that | supposedly teach or are based on postmodernism. ___ I actually do read these sorts of things. Indeed several people have sent me requests for more information because of this thread and I've sent them to those sorts of things. My favorite is the following: http://www.angelfire.com/de/jwp/ By and large I find the stuff about postmodernism on the web is quite good. No worse than what you find on Descartes, Nietzsche, Kant or others. (Which isn't to say there isn't a lot of garbage - but that's true of anything.) What is so amazing to me is how many *good* analysis of literature there are out there using postmodernism. For instance here are a few I liked on Shakespeare after just a few seconds on google. I haven't seen too many really bad "political" ones. (Which http://eserver.org/emc/1-2/degrazia.html http://www.eastern.edu/academic/trad_undg/sas/depts/english/SiriThesis.htm Anyway, in terms of what is written I simply don't see *that* big a problem. Yeah I'd hate to be in an English department. Yeah there are plenty of small obscure journals that appear to exist only to fill out associate professor's vita regardless of quality. But there are lots of interesting criticism written. And I *honestly* don't see it particularly worse today than in the days when other forms of criticism were the "fad." -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 07 Aug 2002 01:37:09 -0600 [MOD: This has been an interesting conversation; however, I'd like to suggest that any further discussion come back, somehow, to something more connected to Mormon literature...] ---Original Message From: Eric R. Samuelsen > > Me, a couple weeks ago: > > >> Demonstrably false. A great many governmental programs to > alleviate > >> poverty are quite successful, provided that they are adequately > >> funded and intelligently administered. > > >If it's demonstrably false, then you're gonna have to demonstrate. > > Jacob threw down this particular gauntlet, and then, poor > man, had to wait while his opponent skulked off to > Disneyland. (Actually, we went to Northern California, so it > was Paramount's Great America, but same diff.) I've been keeping myself busy annoying Clark. Probably just as well you were away... > Still, there > that ol' gauntlet is, laying there on the ground. May I > please beg the indulgence of our esteemed moderator, and > offer a response to Jacob's challenge? > > When we think of 'government welfare,' most people focus on > just a few, controversial programs: ADC (Aid to Dependent > Children) and food stamps probably top the list. Those > programs have been both attacked and defended,and attacking > or defending them may be the most significant difference > between the political right and left. I believe that some of > those programs have been successful and can be defended, but > they're not quite what I have in mind; they're not clearly, > obviously successful. You've opened up the discussion to *all* government programs--many of which weren't primarily aimed at alleviating poverty. As such, you've opened this up to government bad vs. government good and that's too large for the list--or at least too large for me. Also, you snipped my further explanation that describes why I make the statement so blanket and why I don't think even *Church* programs alleviate poverty, either. > Far more successful would be some of the following (and I'm > only going to describe a few): > > Rural Electrification, the REA and the TVA and similar > programs. > Headstart and school lunch programs. > Pell grants, GSL's and other student loan programs. > FHA, Fannie Mae, and other housing loan programs. > Civil rights laws and enforcement agencies: > The GI Bill, and VA. > I could name a hundred more brilliantly successful government > programs that alleviate poverty. Some are controversial, > like labor laws. I'm very pro-union; some people aren't, so > I usually don't like to list them. But for my grandfather, > the steel workers union is the single biggest reason he was > able to rise from poverty. Some of those are just fine, some less so, none of them alleviate poverty. Certainly not long-term. Again, I explained this before when I said that programs don't alleviate poverty. Poverty is alleviated by changes of heart and work and growth. > >In a lot of cases, the poor *are* to blame for their poverty. Being > >shy to say that is a part of what keeps people poor. Not that there > >isn't enough blame to go around--government programs, capitalists, > >>businesses, and neighbors can all play supporting roles in keeping > >people down. > > Interesting, since King Benjamin absolutely prohibits our > saying that the poor are to blame for their poverty. No he doesn't. He prohibits us from withholding our substance from the poor who are threatened by death if they don't get assistance. He tells us that we are not allowed to say that someone deserves to *die* just because they made poor decisions. Life is more important than teaching some moral lesson to people not ready/willing/likely to learn. > >Now, I'd be interested in the people of your old ward and how you'd > >define poverty. What constitutes "next to impossible"? And who are > >>the poor? > > I define poor as people who go to bed hungry on a fairly > regular basis. You had people like that in your ward? So much so that you'd describe them as a majority? > > I suspect that our definitions of poor are out of sync. > For example, > >I don't put any stock into comparative income evaluations > >which are a > >big part of claims that "the poor are getting poorer" (which > I consider > >bunk). > > I don't put much stock in 'em either. I think the government > poverty index is fatally flawed, in that it indexes poverty > to food costs, not housing costs. I think there are far more > poor people in America than official government statistics > suggest, and that they're getting a lot poorer a lot faster > than we currently suspect. Either measurement is flawed. If you define poor people as those who go to bed hungry on a regular basis, I think you'd be hard pressed to a) come up with a way to measure them and b) find very many in the U.S. at all. Barring children who are dependent on their parents/guardians for food and shelter, people in the U.S. who go to bed hungry regularly are doing so out of choice. Too many programs exist for the express purpose of giving people free food for people to go hungry on a regular basis. I don't know of *any* who fit that description. And if you have a hard time with rising housing costs, give it another year--maybe less. There's a glut right now brought on by over-investment and speculation that is due for a correction. Talk to people in construction right now and you'll find that jobs are increasingly scarce and workers are having to be more mobile to remain employed. Bad enough when caused by an honest growth slowdown, but we've also had a period of speculation (where owners leverage equity to purchase more real estate because, hey, real estate always goes up, right? Just like stocks do . . .) Pursued too avidly, it leads to self-sustaining price inflation that eventually runs out only to have those prices fall dramatically (and people who owe $300,000 find themselves with $100,000 worth of real estate). That's what we've seen in the last three to five years and has caused what you see in housing prices. It'll reset soon and those prices will go down--probably dramatically. I think it has already plateaued with housing costs stabilizing and time on market extending (some three times longer or so as far as I can tell). > >I'd be willing to bet that when you talk about "the > >poor" you aren't referring to the same folks I am when I talk about > >"the poor". > > Some things are obvious; drug and alcohol addictions > obviously hold a lot of folks back. If there's a single > demonstrable failure among all government programs for the > poor, it would be current drug laws, which provide for > absurdly draconion penalties for minor drug offenses, ruining > the lives of thousands of young people who, because of a > single mistake, become career criminals. Frankly, I agree with you here, but I have to be careful because I'm not a drug-legalization advocate. I just think the penalties are disproportionate, particularly in practice. Functionally, drug use carries penalties harsher than dealing (because dealers have more leverage for plea bargains and higher up dealers have enough money to hire better lawyers and/or elude authorities). > But aside from > that, I would say two things hold folks back, make it > impossible for the working poor to escape poverty: chld care, > and housing expenses. Those two expenses just eat people up. > I've seen it hundred times, people (usually women, sometimes > single women, but not always) work long hours with great > diligence, but can't get ahead for a second, because of the > difficulty finding decent child care or decent housing. A > third huge expense is medical; you can survive for awhile > without health insurance, but every day you're rolling the > dice. So then one day, you roll your ankle, and suddenly any > progress you've made is lost. Housing is harsh, but then, people's standards have risen enough in the last three decades that it doesn't have to be--the vast majority of people today live in houses that are larger and have more amenities than the houses their parents had at the same stage in life. It'd be a *lot* easier to afford housing if you had the same standard as they had before. Child care is voluntary--at least, for the *vast* majority of cases. Raising children is a choice and I cringe at the heartless, selfish decisions that thrust children into day care so young and so long. The third is trickier because health care *is* expensive and our system is messed up in huge ways--mostly because those choosing the service are not those paying the costs. Having a baby with a full week hospital stay used to be affordable to the vast majority of people who could pay it out of pocket (more or less). Not hardly possible any more. Insurance started out a good idea, but like unions, they've drifted so far in their current implementations that they've become part of the *problem* and are no longer a part of the solution. > I'd suggest some further reading. A great book on welfare > is a recent one, LynNell Hancock's Hands to Work. Barbara > Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed is terrific. There are any > number of far more scholarly works, the titles of which I > can't remember right now. Why? Are you assuming that my problem is education? That if I knew what you know that I'd agree with you? That isn't often the case, as much as it is often the assumption. I know it is *hard*. I know that people struggle. I know what it costs to live and I know what it is like to live on poverty-level income. My dad went back to school (BYU Law School) with 7 children and my mom didn't work outside our home. He graduated with *9* children. It was probably pretty hard on them, but it wasn't on us kids because they did what had to be done and made it through. Since I'm the oldest, my memory of that time is relatively sharp and I can tell you that we didn't go to bed hungry and we didn't really know how little money we had. We had a good home, friends, faith, and we learned the things we needed to know to become responsible adults. > >Following the Church welfare program means not accepting government > >>aid. You can't have them "in conjunction" within the policy > of Church > >welfare. Exceptions might be made, but I haven't heard of them and > >would be surprised if they passed "official" muster. > > Not so. The bishop's handbook is filled with programs that > he can recommend to struggling families. Seriously, bishops > can't counsel families to send their kids to Headstart, or to > apply for an FHA loan? Nonsense. Again, you're equating > 'welfare' with 'ADC'. Actually, you missed the clarifications by Jonathan that showed just what you say. Church policy is to use the resources you have available and to use any outside sources in such a way as to promote self-reliance. I was wrong in my interpretation of the more limited documents I have as resources. > >Since all King Benjamin's examples were personal and his address was > >personal I think an assumption of personal (as opposed to > >>governmental) responsibility towards the poor is warranted. > > How can you possibly say this? He's the king. L'etat c'est > moi. He's the head of the executive branch of government. > He's probably also the entire legislative branch. He's > probably also a one man judicial branch. He's the government. And his vocabulary is all chosen with individuals in mind. Where he could have said "a man" he said "you", and where he could have said "your king" he said "I". He wasn't speaking from organization to collective, he was talking from person to person. At least, that's my interpretation of the address, and I think it is a fully supportable one. > Look, I like Jacob, and I think he's a friend, and our > differences on these questions are, I hope, the differences > of friends. But as Mormon culture has become increasingly > conservative, so have conservative ideas begun to permeate > our culture. This is not a bad thing. But it becomes a very > bad thing when we begin to conflate our own personal > political agendas with the culture itself, or, heaven > forfend, the gospel. And that, frankly, is an interesting > subject for writers, especially writers who have a political > bent. What is the relationship between culture and Truth? > What is the relationship between conservatism and Mormonism? > As a writer, I'm interested in the interstices of those > relationships. Me too, which is why I enjoy your ideas, even when we disagree. LDS culture *is* very conservative, and exploring the relationship between culture and Truth is not only interesting, I think it is crucial. An idea I stole from the movie "Pleasantville"--worthwhile flick altogether. It may be all well and good to hire the wagon driver who doesn't know how close to the edge he can get (because his job is to stay as far away from it as possible). But *somebody* had better be walking up to the edge to take a peek over now and again or you'll risk more than a wagon--you'll risk the whole wagon train and closing down important infrastructure if the edge was undercut and nobody knew it. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] Chaim Potok Dies Date: 07 Aug 2002 08:42:15 -0600 When Potok visited BYU, he said his work was greeted with "ambivalence" in the orthodox Jewish community (though I'm sure the ultra-orthodox Hasidic community would've been less "ambivalent" and likely quite harsh.) My impression was not that he was an outcast (he was an ordained rabbi), but not fully accepted--rather like Maurine Whipple in our own culture. I recall his discussion _My Name is Asher Lev_ to a group of Jewish mothers, one of whom had a singular question about Asher's choice of art (the portrayal of his own parents being crucified): "But why would he want to hurt his parents like that?" [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gkeystone@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Utopias Date: 07 Aug 2002 10:52:52 EDT In a message dated 8/6/02 10:51:06 PM Mountain Standard Time, ersamuel@byugate.byu.edu writes: > One final salvo: > > >In the eighties when taxes went down charitable giving rose much > >more sharply than ever before. > > Sure. Makes for a nice tax deduction. Private charitable giving is > subsidized by the government. It is, in short, a government program. > > Eric Samuelsen > > Glen Sudbury Writes: Just because the government gives a tax deduction for various personal spending items such as private charitable giving, private or home education, tithing, or any 501 3C foundation or corporation does not make it a government program unless one has made the assumption that all money belongs to the government and it gets to deside how we will spend it. Maybe that is not what you're saying here, but it strikes me as a bit of a stretch to say my church contributions being a tax deduction makes the Church, "in short" or in long a Government program . -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: [AML] re: Institutional Repentance Date: 07 Aug 2002 09:00:49 -0600 I'm going to do an unusual thing and let you see a small portion of t= he last installment of _Standing on the Promises_. I do this because I'= m reading various reports of who did what research and see that nobody = so far has a sense of just how extensive the research was on the subject= of blacks and the priesthood. Not only did Bruce McConkie research it, EVERY MEMBER OF THE TWELVE did. In addition, President Kimball asked= a number of people, often during interviews for leadership positions, w= hat they thought of the issue, and what they thought would happen were blacks to be given priesthood rights. This is not a final draft, but= it might give you an idea of some of what preceded the revelation. It a= ll reinforces the idea that we must study out an issue in our minds befo= re expecting revelation. President Kimball's son, Ed, gave me much of t= he information. BEGINNING OF PASSAGE: I wonder if you remember Spencer Kimball like I do. He was round, mostly bald, and had big ears and thick glasses. Most the world wouldn=92t call him handsome. Then again, most the world looks on th= e outward appearance, not the heart. That man=92s heart made him beautiful. By this year, his voice had been plundered by cancer, and his damaged heart was familiar with the operating table. He was old = and he was weak in many ways, but strong in the most important. I can st= ill picture him making his slow way to the Salt Lake temple day after day= , solemn as the spires above. He=92d climb to the fourth floor, and a= fter everyone else was gone, there he=92d kneel and pour out his heart to = God, wanting only what God wanted. He knew a possibility lay before the Church which would matter in all nations. It was as important as wha= t Paul learned the day he was told to carry the gospel to the gentiles: that what God had cleansed no man should call common. Brother Spence= r knew he could receive revelation=96if he was ready to. "Lord , he prayed, I want only what is right. We are not making any plans to be spectacularly moving. We want only the thing that thou d= ost want, and we want it when you want it and not until." Besides making those many petitions to the Almighty, he asked each member of the Twelve to research the issue, to review what all the ea= rly leaders had said, and to search the scriptures. They all had to stud= y this out in their minds. Such was part of opening their hearts and e= ars to whatever God would tell them. For months, the First Presidency and the Twelve talked over these matters in the temple, and President Kimball met with each apostle to hear what he had to say on the subject. It was Thursday, June first, that the general authorities were holdi= ng their regular monthly fast and testimony meeting. When dismissal tim= e came, the members of the Seventy and the Presiding Bishopric were excused, but President Kimball asked the apostles if they=92d be will= ing to remain in the temple. The time was come. In that raspy, tender growl, President Kimball as= ked each of these men to tell how they felt, what they had learned, how t= hey should proceed. For over two hours they talked, and bonded in a unit= y we all ought to feel. Each man understood that the Lord was in char= ge, and they were dependent on Him. They surrounded the temple altar. Spencer Kimball himself requested = to be the voice. He knelt and pleaded with God to make his mind and wil= l known. He begged for direction which could move the Church forward a= nd open the borders so we could take the gospel to all nations, kindreds and tongues, that the fullness of the restoration could be given all men, based only on their worthiness, not their race or color. He tol= d the Lord if it wasn't right, if this change was not to come in the Church, that he would be true to the policy all the rest of his life, and fight the world against it if that's what was required. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Utopias Date: 07 Aug 2002 08:20:16 -0700 on 8/6/02 11:05 AM, Eric R. Samuelsen at ersamuel@byugate.byu.edu wrote: > One final salvo: > >> In the eighties when taxes went down charitable giving rose much >> more sharply than ever before. > > Sure. Makes for a nice tax deduction. Private charitable giving is > subsidized by the government. It is, in short, a government program. > > Eric Samuelsen Wrong-oh. When they kept more of their money instead of having it stolen by the government they were more charitable in general. The rate went from 70% to 28%. Charitable deductions don't make the difference. The amount the gov got went up too--doubled in nine years, way beyond inflation. Best of all the top 1/%'s share of taxes went from 18% to 39% in 1989. Paid more to the government too. Forced government charity is not the same as the voluntary kind. Ole King Benjamin didn't confiscate at the point of the sword and then redistribute. He set a good example and preached. Not the same thing at all. I've read a number of books where merchants are particularly singled out as those who never give charity. It's so common that it's a cliche in historical fiction and fantasy. If you go back a little and look at real history, however, you'll find that merchants were always the most generous of the wealthy. Once upon a time the truth was more recognized. Jane Austen's Emma was proud and silly, but spent many hours helping the less fortunate. Ivanhoe fought for Rebecca without thought of reward. Both were upper middle class, of course, but Ebenezer Scrooge hadn't been invented yet so it was more natural to be truthful rather than cajoling. Of course my only contact with Ebenezer Scrooge is in literature and movies. Never met such a person--I know CEOs and lots of wealthy Republicans and not one of them is remotely similar. Jim Wilson aka The Laird Jim -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Education Week Get-Together Date: 07 Aug 2002 10:07:57 -0600 At 06:05 PM 8/6/02 +0000, you wrote: >Also, I got paltry few suggestions for an eating establishment. Please, >please, if you're familiar with the Provo/Orem area, could you suggest >something? I'm leaning more towards Orem so that we can escape the Ed. >Week crowds, but make a suggestion. Prestwich Farms in Orem has a separate room for large parties. They serve what I consider a good variety of foods, so if you don't like one kind of ethnic food, you're not out of luck. (I, for example, dislike Mexican food and Indian food.) We'd need to know how many people plan to attend and then find out if the room is large enough. barbara -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] Unsavory Etymologies Date: 07 Aug 2002 13:49:30 -0400 I think you're right Eric. I must say that the word grates on my nerves. It's not one we use in our homes, hear at church, or even with most of our non-member friends. But when I'm in the store, at the library, on the street...whatever, I hear it a lot. It's more routine than commas or periods. Especially with young males--age 6 and up. Tracie Laulusa > > I think the F word isn't a swear word anymore. It's become casual conversational. > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 07 Aug 2002 13:27:46 -0700 Here is what I found in my research of the Priesthood Revelation in 1978. I feel it is from good authority, and I do not believe those people who are in the position of leadership in the church are in the habit of lying. ___________________________- Few things have had a greater impact on the gospel's worldwide progress than did the revelation received in 1978 through President Spencer W. Kimball extending the blessing of the to members of all races. Over the years, Blacks had been free to join the Church and were welcomed at its activities, but they could not receive the . Latter-day Saints accepted this as inspired, but it increasingly became the subject of criticism and attacks, especially during the widespread agitation for civil rights in the 1960s. A few, even within the Church, tauntingly suggested that the Prophet should "receive a revelation" to change the policy. Significantly, however, the revelation did not come in the face of these pressures, but it came in due course over a decade later when such agitation had largely ceased. Just as had been the case in 1890, divine revelation rather than external pressures brought the important change. Over a period of several months the General Authorities discussed at length in their regular temple meetings the matter of extending the blessings of the priesthood. In addition to these deliberations, President Kimball frequently went to the temple, particularly on Saturdays and Sundays when he could be in that holy place alone in order to plead for guidance. "I want to be sure," he later reflected. In recalling the events associated with this time period, President Kimball explained: I remember very vividly that day after day I walked to the temple and ascended to the fourth floor where we have our solemn assemblies and where we have our meetings of the Twelve and the First Presidency. After everybody had gone out of the temple, I knelt and prayed. I prayed with much fervency. I knew that something was before us that was extremely important to many of the children of God. I knew that we could receive the revelations of the Lord only by being worthy and ready for them and ready to accept them and put them into place. Day after day I went alone and with great solemnity and seriousness in the upper rooms of the temple, and there I offered my soul and offered my efforts to go forward with the program. I wanted to do what he wanted. I talked about it to him and said, "Lord, I want only what is right. We are not making any plans to be spectacularly moving. We want only the thing thou dost want, and we want it when you want it and not until." On 1 June 1978, nearly all the General Authorities gathered, fasting, for their regular monthly meeting in the temple. After this three-hour session which was filled with spiritual uplift and enlightenment, President Kimball invited his counselors and the Twelve to remain while the other General Authorities were excused. When the First Presidency and the Twelve were alone, he again brought up the possibility of conferring the priesthood on worthy brethren of all races. He expressed the hope that there might be a clear answer received one way or the other. "At this point," Elder Bruce R. McConkie recalled, "President Kimball asked the brethren if any of them desired to express their feelings and views as to the matter at hand. We all did so, freely and fluently and at considerable length, each person stating his views and manifesting the feelings of his heart. There was a marvelous outpouring of unity, oneness, and agreement in the council." After a two-hour discussion, President Kimball asked the group to unite in formal prayer and modestly suggested that he act as voice. He recalled: I told the Lord if it wasn't right, if He didn't want this change to come in the Church that I would be true to it all the rest of my life, and I'd fight the world . . . if that's what He wanted. . . . I had a great deal to fight, myself largely, because I had grown up with this thought that Negroes should not have the priesthood and I was prepared to go all the rest of my life till my death and fight for it and defend it as it was. But this revelation and assurance came to me so clearly that there was no question about it. Elder McConkie further described the occasion: It was during this prayer that the revelation came. The Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon us all; we felt something akin to what happened on the day of Pentecost and at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple. From the midst of eternity, the voice of God, conveyed by the power of the Spirit, spoke to his prophet. . . . And we all heard the same voice, received the same message, and became personal witnesses that the word received was the mind and will and voice of the Lord. Reflecting on this experience, President Spencer W. Kimball and President Ezra Taft Benson and others of the Twelve concurred that none "had ever experienced anything of such spiritual magnitude and power as was poured out upon the Presidency and the Twelve that day in the upper room in the house of the Lord." During the following week, an official announcement of this revelation was prepared under President Kimball's direction. On 9 June 1978, this inspired announcement was approved by the General Authorities and was issued to the public. "As we have witnessed the expansion of the work of the Lord over the earth," the Brethren declared, "we have been grateful that people of many nations have responded to the message of the restored gospel, and have joined the Church in ever-increasing numbers. This, in turn, has inspired us with a desire to extend to every worthy member of the Church all of the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords." Witnessing "the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld," Church leaders pleaded "long and earnestly" in behalf of these people. "He [the Lord] has heard our prayers," the Brethren affirmed, "and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings off the temple" (Official Declaration 2). This revelation was approved at the fall general conference that year, and was added to the Doctrine and Covenants as "Official Declaration 2" in the new 1981 section. The impact of this revelation was far-reaching. Faithful black Latter-day rejoiced as they received long-hoped-for ordination to the priesthood, mission calls, calls to serve in bishoprics or stake presidencies, and, of course, the eternal blessings of the temple. In November 1978, just five months after the revelation came, the First Presidency called two experienced couples to open missionary work in the black nations of Nigeria and Ghana. Source: Robert L. Millet and Kent P. Jackson, eds., Studies in Scripture, Vol. 1: The Doctrine and Covenants [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1989], 570.) ___________________ Isn't this the Lords plan to teach every kindred tongue and people the plan of salvation and the gospel of Jesus Christ? This is what we need to be writing about instead of arguing over whether or not our early prophets made any mistakes. Of course they made mistakes. We all do. That is what we are here for. No mortal, save Jesus, was ever on this earth in a perfect state of grace. We come to earth to learn how to apply principles of righteousness. The process of learning requires that we make mistakes, and hopefully we learn from those mistakes. Fortunately the ban on the priesthood, no matter what its source has been lifted by God, acting through his prophets, seers. and revelators. God is in charge, and with his help we will get the job done, if we all work together and quit bickering. Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 07 Aug 2002 14:28:42 -0700 [MOD: Kathy raises a very interesting and I think important question here about whether emotions really are spiritually neutral, etc. I'd like to see some further discussion of this point--including how it applies to literature intended (for example) to invoke feelings of fear--e.g., horror stories. Let's have a good, rousing--but respectful--discussion.] >>With all due respect to the idea of music being neutral--hogwash. >>Who hasn't seen a baby calm down with a soothing lullaby? Hasn't >everyone >>heard a particularly jammin' song and couldn't help but tap their feet >when >>it came on the radio? >I mean, it's all morally neutral. Of course music is effective; that's why we like it so much. That's >why we love it. Different sorts of sounds evoke different emotions. I just think all >those emotions are morally neutral, and that's why they'd better be spiritually neutral. Otherwise >we'd only be able to feel the Spirit when we felt certain emotions, whereas we need the Spirit >during all emotional states. >Eric Samuelsen I know, Eric, that you will be able to talk circles around me on this one, but I disagree on some very fundamental levels. During my depression years I found it extremely difficult to feel the Spirit due to the great degree of despair and fear I was in. When I reached a point where I was no longer in that state, my ability to hear the Spirit increased. Even now, ten years (plus) later, if I'm in a place of fear, anger, obstinancy (pride), hate, or any combination or type of these, my ability to hear the Spirit is lessened. To whatever degree I am in a place of these negative emotions, that is the degree the Spirit cannot get through to me. Emotions like these are so loud in their clamour in one's heart, and the cacaphony of blaming, yelling, accusing, and vengeful dialogue is so loud in one's mind, that the Spirit just can't get through. Negative emotions that come under the "headings" so to speak of hate, fear, pride, and anger (a hopeless despair includes all of these) harden one's heart to the Spirit. Love, faith, joy, peace, or even a *desire* to feel these things (because that desire is a step toward God rather than away from Him) softens the heart, and allows the Spirit to flow more freely and be heard more clearly. See 2 Tim 1:7, and the topical guide under fear, hardhearted, stiffnecked, and/or pride. Emotions are never neutral in terms of being able to feel and hear the Spirit, and music, because of its ability to evoke those emotions, is also not neutral, unless it is never played, or never heard. Is it even true music if it is never heard, never played? To me, essentially deaf to written music, it is only markings on a page, until it is played. It only becomes real and meaningful when heard by a listening ear and a heart that responds. I also looked up 'song' in the topical guide -- I don't even begin to comprehend the meaning of music to our Father in Heaven, and how it was used in the Israelites' relationship with God, but what I saw in the OT alone makes me certain that to Him, music is definitely not neutral. Is there a book that discourses knowledgably on the OT and song? On a different note, 2 Chronicles 29:27 says, "And when the burnt offering began, the song of the LORD began also with the trumpets, and with the instruments ordained by David king of Israel." But I doubt I'll see anyone playing the trumpet in Sacrament Meeting any time soon. I sure wish I could have heard that guitar though! That is an instrument I sorely miss in church. (Catholic mass...the nuns played guitar a LOT when I was growing up.) Kathy Fowkes -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Polemical Style (was: Newspaper Wars) Date: 07 Aug 2002 14:44:48 -0700 (PDT) An interesting article in the Salt Lake "City Weekly" on controversial "Deseret News" columnist Marianne Jennings. Note especially the pungent quote from fellow DN columnist (and AML's own) Ann Edwards Cannon near the end of the piece. http://www.slweekly.com/editorial/2002/mdia_2002-08-01.cfm Dorothy Parker once wrote that she admired Hemingway's style but detested his imitators: "Just look at the boys who try to do it." Perhaps the most influential American journalist of the 20th century was H.L. Mencken, whose sardonic, bitterly funny rants are still fresh and readable 80 years later. There are a lot of Mencken imitators around. The "F.A.R.M.S. Review of Books" is full of them. Perhaps the best nationally known Mencken wanna-be is P.J. O'Rourke. Jennings obviously aspires to Mencken-hood. She can be correct about some things. But her style displays more spleen than wit. It's hectoring and so lacking in human warmth that it repels more than it attracts. (Ann Cannon is the perfect antidote.) ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better http://health.yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ethan Skarstedt" Subject: RE: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 07 Aug 2002 16:48:10 -0600 Clark Goble wrote: "The only thing I'm sure of in the matter is that the Lord ended it." Of course, if we're certain the Lord ended it, it stands to reason that we are equally sure he started it(or at least approved of it) as well. The church was and is either operating with his blessing and direction or it was and is not, after all. I don't have a problem with that. There are a multitude of reasons that God could have had for blacks being barred from the priesthood that have nothing to do with racism. The idea of God, the father of us all, being racist is internally absurd. I've also heard it said that those born outside the U.S. must have been less worthy in the pre-existence than those born in the U.S. and the same specious arguments are used to justify that as I've heard used surrounding the black/priesthood issue. It's nigh unto futile (but darn entertaining) to speculate on God's reasons for what he does. The one thing I _do_ know that applies here is that our experiences here on Earth are individually tailored to give us the opportunity to learn how to (eventually) become like Jesus in the afterlife. The fact that some folks are presented with trials different than mine (like being denied the priesthood) means nothing in the long run. =20 To tie this in to Mormon Letters I'll throw out an SF idea my Father had in a novel he wrote, that overlaps slightly. The protagonist is a firm believer in the church, the B.O.M., the current prophet and modern revelation etc. . . Problem is he doesn't live on Earth. He lives as part of a galactic civilization that thinks of Earth as a not-to-be-disturbed archaeological/anthropological treasure. He tells another character at one point that he and his fellow galactic-mormons are anxiously awaiting the day Earth discovers space travel on her own and can bring things like the priesthood and baptism to the stars. It's a very minor thing in a very good action SF novel but interesting nonetheless, IMO. Do we assume that all those other "worlds without number" have the priesthood and prophets of their own or not? -Ethan Skarstedt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Education Week Get-Together Date: 07 Aug 2002 17:14:00 -0700 Sounds good. Anyone like Chevy's on University right off the I-15? I asked my wife about a date, but she said I'd have to take her or go by myself. Don't know which yet. Richard Hopkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 07 Aug 2002 17:25:22 -0700 Eric R. Samuelsen wrote: I mean, it's all morally neutral. Of course music is effective; that's why we like it so much. That's why we love it. Different sorts of sounds evoke different emotions. I just think all those emotions are morally neutral, and that's why they'd better be spiritually neutral. Otherwise we'd only be able to feel the Spirit when we felt certain emotions, whereas we need the Spirit during all emotional states. My thoughts: There is only one emotion that I believe is not morally or spiritually neutral--anger. So if some music evokes the emotion of anger, I suppose that could be a problem. This has presented a small problem for me, as a matter of fact, because I personally love Beethoven's 5th, the First Movement. I think it evokes heroics and patriotism. But my wife thinks it sounds angry, so she doesn't like to listen to it. Mind you, she's a huge music fan. In fact, she is the only mother I know of who has been accused of playing her children's music louder than they do. So perhaps it's an individual thing, except that it seems like some rap music--is that music or just poetry recited in a rhythmic tone?--is intended to inspire anger. Before you say that it's just the words, please understand that many people can't really understand the words--to them (me, for example) its just tone and rhythm, and in some cases, that tone and rhythm sounds angry. What about that? Richard Hopkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 07 Aug 2002 19:48:47 -0600 At 11:39 PM 8/6/02 -0600, you wrote: >Come on, all you List members from >English et al.; what think ye of all this?] I think I'm glad I'm no longer teaching English at a university. I also think that if I never hear the word "post-modernism" again, it won't be too soon. barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: OmahaMom@aol.com Subject: [AML] Invoking Emotions (was: "Choose the Rock") Date: 07 Aug 2002 23:05:51 EDT Lyrics, of course, have very definite leanings in whether they are "neutral", or lead up or down, depending on the subject matter and how it is treated. Music does not necessarily have to be a hymn (ours or another religion's) to lead upward. On the other hand, certain rhythms inspire different reactions. Sousa's marches invoke a "get up & get moving" spirit--whether there's an awareness of the title or not. There's a darkness to some music (Grieg's Hall of the Mountain King is one that I think of right off--though the title may not be exact), and peace to others. Some music inspires some reactions, some inspires others. (Try sleeping to Sousa's marches,for example.) There's a reason why people at rock concerts behave differently than people at a classical concert--and it isn't just because of the venue and the way they're dressed. There's a difference in my favorite Israeli folk music. Some is peaceful, has a gentle spirit about it (Ma Nauvoo), and some of it has a warrior-like quality. (Joshua). Visual art also has a different spirit about it that translates to the beholder...and I'm sure you can think of examples from your own experience. As artists with words, or sound, or eye stimulation, we have the ability to invoke a wide gamut of human emotion and experience. It would behoove us to consider what we want to do with that ability, and use it responsibly. Emotion, along with this, is not neutral. If you've ever seen someone who is catatonic schizophrenic--that is neutral--locked inside themselves, experiencing none of the human emotions that most of us feel. (There may be some emotional turmoil going inside, but there isn't a way for them to express it...so they have what medical people call a "flat aspect"--and if you've ever seen it, you know exactly what I mean. It's almost as if their appearance is two dimentional rather than three.) Violent emotion can be very destructive. People who carry anger around with them as their normal demeanor are a negative energy drain on those who are around them...even though their behaviors may be "socially acceptable", it's exhausting to be around them. Does this mean that people can't/shouldn't write gothics, or horrors, or thrillers? I don't think that's the point, so much as recognizing that if we are good at our craft we will inspire some sort of emotional reaction. Is it what we want to inspire? And that's something that only the creator of the work can decide for himself. Karen Tippets -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: [AML] Re: Invoking Emotions (was: "Choose the Rock") Date: 07 Aug 2002 21:54:19 -0600 > > Emotions are never neutral in terms of being able to feel and hear the > Spirit, Was Christ out of the spirit when he wept in sadness over our sins while in the Garden? What was the source of Nephi's great sadness at the sins of his people he saw in vision. Is there any more perfect example of spiritual depression than that found in Joseph's prayer while in Liberty Jail? Can the Spirt even speak through hate? Parley P. Pratt recounts an experience he shared with Joseph Smith while they were both incarcerated in Richmond and where the spirit was certainly in evidence while Joseph portrayed an emotion which has all the trappings of being a hatred of evil: "In one of those tedious nights we had lain as if in sleep till the hour of midnight had passed, while our ears had been pained, while we had listened for hours to the obscene jests, the horrid oaths, the dreadful blasphemies and filthy language of our guards, as they recounted to each other their deeds of murder [and] robbery, which they had committed among the Mormons.... They even boasted of defiling our dashing out the brains of men, women, and children. ".... On a sudden [Joseph] arose to his feet, and spoke in a voice of thunder: 'SILENCE, ye fiends of the infernal pit. In the name of Jesus Christ I rebuke you, and command you to be still;... Cease such talk, or you or I shall die THIS INSTANT!' " He ceased to speak. He stood erect in terrible majesty. Chained, and without a weapon; calm unruffled and dignified as an angel, he looked upon the quailing guards, whose weapons were lowered...whose knees smote together...who begged his pardon, and ceased their abuse." I think the Spirit can speak equally through all emotions. Pride is the only thing that can stop the spirit, but Pride isn't an emotion but rather a reflection of one's self-love. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 07 Aug 2002 21:59:27 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 4:48 PM Clark Goble wrote: "The only thing I'm sure of in the matter is that the Lord ended it." Of course, if we're certain the Lord ended it, it stands to reason that we are equally sure he started it(or at least approved of it) as well. ME: Not necessarily. It could have been that the Lord was letting his leaders make their own mistakes and waited until they wised up enough to ask for further light and knowledge. The church was and is either operating with his blessing and direction or it was and is not, after all. ME: Maybe part of His direction is to let us simmer in our own juices on occasion, to live with our own mistakes. Isn't that a part of maturing, after all. I don't have a problem with that. There are a multitude of reasons that God could have had for blacks being barred from the priesthood that have nothing to do with racism. The idea of God, the father of us all, being racist is internally absurd. ME: But does it necessarily follow that his children, even his chosen leaders, can't be racist on occasion? All of us (even prophets) learn precept by precept. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: [AML] Re: Invoking Emotions (was: "Choose the Rock") Date: 07 Aug 2002 22:09:23 -0600 > There is only one emotion that I believe is not morally or spiritually > neutral--anger. Think about Christ rebuking the folks outside the temple? Joseph Smith rebuking the guards at Liberty? Strong emotions both. Was the spirit not present at those times. I think Mormons have a misconception that anger is not a Chirst-like emotion. Anger toward sin and hypocrites -- you can't get more Christ-like than that. The uncontrolled anger due to pride is the bad kind. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 07 Aug 2002 23:45:06 -0700 I read DROWNING RUTH and PEACE LIKE A RIVER. I liked them both, but thought PEACE LIKE A RIVER had more beautiful language in it. I especially liked the scene at the beginning where the little girl (I can't remember her name, I read is six months ago) is on a goose hunt with her father and brothers. The descriptions were absolutely tactile. I was transported. I have not read EMPIRE FALLS, but the mention of it reminded me of a book I really liked called KAATERSKILL FALLS. Anyone read that? Now there is a story of an insular community (Jewish) that deals with women's issues and family issues, but doesn't try to judge, condemn or apologize for anything about the religious beliefs of the characters. It has universal appeal and gave me insight into a lifestyle other than my own. LDS stories can/should do that too. I was at the SLC City Library the other day and did a search on "LDS fiction". 210 entries came back. I've started in on reading my way through them all. I was surprised at some of the things I expected to find, but weren't on the search list--like THE GIANT JOSHUA by Maureen Whipple. Granted, it's old and out of print, but if you can't find out of print books at a large library system, where can you find them? Guess I'll try the U's library next. Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fred C Pinnegar Subject: Re: [AML] ANDERSON, _Recollections of Private Seth Jackson_ in Date: 08 Aug 2002 00:20:47 -0600 (MDT) > Paris Anderson is a fine writer of unusual talent, whose work with children's literature deserves more attention from us. His Seth book is about a boy who wrangles an enlistment in the Mormon Battalion and participates in the events of that long march. The story is told through his eyes and through his language. Paris renders a believable and readable vernacular and makes the story viable for youthful readers, who might otherwise find the military history in which nothing in particular of a military nature happens dull indeed. I understand that Paris' inspired illustrated children's book, Tough Luck: Sitting Bull's Horse, will soon be available again. If his publisher had any backbone at all he would also publish that cycle of probing poems called Argentina. Fred Pinnegar -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Chaim Potok Dies Date: 07 Aug 2002 23:25:17 -0700 On Tue, 06 Aug 2002 11:33:28 -0600 "Eric R. Samuelsen" writes: > But let's not forget one salient fact: Potok was outcast from the > orthodox Jewish community because of what he wrote. That was the > price he paid, and it was for him a deeply painful one. I certainly > hope that a Mormon Chaim Potok would not be excommunicated. But > Potok, essentially, was excommunicated. A very sobering thought. > > Eric Samuelsen Eric, Could you document this? Potok was an editor for the Jewish Publication League(Society?), his name appears in their translation of the Hebrew Bible, and he spoke about the translation in one of his sessions at BYU, which suggests that he was very much a part of his religious community. He did suggest that he became a rabbi more for intellectual reasons than spiritual, but I haven't heard anything about Potok being as controversial as Phillip Roth or Noam Chomsky, who was excommunicated by his synagogue when he spoke out (in the NY Times?) against an Israeli massacre in a Palestinian refugee camp in the early 80's. If he was as controversial as either of these authors I'd like to read about it. I have a particular interest in authors who are cast out or off by their culture. The deep irony is that those are often the writers people outside the culture look to for a sympathetic portrait of the culture. I read Roth's _Goodbye Columbus_ as a teenager and found it a moving, sympathetic portrait of Jewish Life. I particularly love "Eli the Fanatic." I know some people object strongly to his portraying American Jews as bigots for their treatment of eastern European refugee Jews in that story and elsewhere. Others object to his portraying the immigrants as superstitious. My impression reading _The Promise_ and _My Name is Asher Lev_ is that Potok is much gentler than Roth. I haven't read either author for a long time, so I don't know if I'd still have that impression, but I've got several books by each to read. Anyway, I would like to know where I can learn more about Potok's in-effect excommunication. I'm slowly reading IBS's book of stories about post-war refugees (the same group early Potok and Roth wrote about) _Passions_ ("While I hope and pray for the redemption and the resurrection, I dare say that, for me, these people are all living right now. In literature, as in our dreams, death does not exist."), and the odd thing is that Singer portrays these people with all their folk ways and superstitions, and the tension between them and American Jews, and no one worries about it. _Enemies: A Love Story_ (I love the Yiddish title Sonim [I think]: Die Geschichte fun a Liebe.) is also a fine piece, especially in its picture of how the survivors went about finding each other, things like advertising in Yiddish newspapers, and some of the consequences of that finding. I haven't read _Shadows on the Hudson_ yet (got my copy at American Fark DI May 3, 2001 for $2), which takes place in 1947-49, and was published serially in Yiddish in The Forward in '57 & '58 but an NPR reviewer said that Singer wouldn't allow it to be published in English during his lifetime because it was such a bitter novel and he was trying to cultivate a gentle grandfatherly image. The reviewer also felt the book wouldn't add much to Singer's reputation. Harlow Clark ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Request for Prayers Date: 07 Aug 2002 23:25:04 -0700 Well, just when I thought I had solved most of my computer problems, except not being able to get the motherboard to recognize the IDE secondary master, I ran into another when I uninstalled Cheyenne Anti-virus a week ago to make more room on my Win98 hdd, and got a nasty message next time I turned on the computer (and every other time) to the effect that Win 98 ran into a problem initializing configmg.vxd. Scanreg/restore failed repeatedly, but I was able to solve the problem today (Monday Aug 5) without reinstalling Windows when the one good registry file I hadn't tried restored successfully. So I collected my e-mail and found these haunting words from Margaret Young: "Thom's post about "We've Only Just Begun" and Harlow's about the tragedy his family is facing have left me really emotional. Thanks for sharing, both of you. Not much more to say. Such things leave us all speechless, don't they?" I found Thom's post and have been thinking about it all day. I'm so sorry, Thom. Thank you all for your love expressed both on- and off-list. Our ward has had a whole spate of sadness. Our neighbor across the street was just released as RS President partly because her son Ben developed leukemia. We borrowed their video camera to take some footage of David before he went to Primary Children's and when Karen saw it she said it brought back so many memories, as Ben was a preemie 20 years ago. The tragedy was made more difficult for David because of distance--his parents live in Moroni and Spring City (80 or 90 miles away), and complicated by family politics. David's mother joined the Manti polly gamists years ago (since left), so he grew up mostly outside the Church and had just started attending again when Sarah met him. His mother and some brothers and sisters came to the wedding, but when the bp. admonished Sarah and David to get to the temple as soon as they could--standard advice when bishops perform weddings--the family thought he was really talking to them, that they had walked into an ambush, so to speak, so they didn't come to the funeral, afraid of being ambushed again, though his mother was at the hospital for the good byes. (I'm listening to Patsy Cline as I write this. Her music is so poignant to me because of that stupid airplane crash. Gotta get a record that has "Crazy" on it.) Before this latest computer mishap I was able to read Scott Parkin's piece from 5/30/02 about Accepting Each Other's Offerings, and remembered it when Donna asked me to write a poem for the funeral, "One that us non-poetry types can understand." My first thought was, 'Oh no, Dennis is going to be there and I'm going to embarrass myself with a bad poem. Maybe Sarah could write one.' I actually said that last sentence, but immediately swallowed my pride and decided to accept Sarah's offering--her need for a poem, and give my offering. As I was thinking about what to say it occurred to me that a brief form, like haiku, would be appropriate for a brief life, so I created the poem as a series of brief images. Early Gifts And now my life is ended And now my life is just begun --Chidiock Tichbourne, age 18, from a sonnet written in the Tower of London on the eve of his execution 1. Independence Day -- 23 Weeks A gift wanted by both but neither ready Unreadiness could only delay a week the artificial womb Substitute umbilicals attached to hands and feet or arms and head, Chest heaving and fluttering -- "It's the respirator." 2. Vitals 13 1/2 inches, 1 lb. 12 oz--less a few, some regained David Don Erickson, Jr. Harley (David's son) for short Cut in stone a name longer than he is. 3. Personality Turn off the bili lights, uncover his face He may open his eyes for a second of two Take out an unused I-V line he will move Vigorously "I've pissed him off but good," the nurse says. 4. Life Flight Duct between aorta and vein didn't close. Neeed surgery. Palm the size of my first knuckle, So we lay fingers on your head Anointing in Jesus' name. Surgery worked; other things went wrong 5. Scrubbing up Wanting clean hands for his pure heart David pumps foamy soap onto throw away sponge and bristles Fingernails, fingers, between fingers, elbows, arms, 3 minutes each hand Then keeps hands at his side, palms out and down. 6. Heat Wave In the 4th year of drought July sun adds more heat than usual Dries lawns, wets clothes Inside a sign: Infant _quickly_ drops temperature Avoid leaving port holes open for any longer than necessary Please cluster care 7. Leaven Yeast is good for bread of life This lump should remain unleavened Instead strep joins, and bacteria And David is forming mucus around the respiration tube To protect himself There will be no feast of unleavened bread 8. Pioneer Day "Have you asked the baby what he wants?" Cousin Carrie says. 9. Madonna and Child "You can stick your finger in through the wing door," Sarah says He holds my finger again after a week Camera's flash annoys him and he lets go Turn off the flash and try again. With Sarah holding his hand take pictures through the incubator Sweet and soothing words, "It's ok, my baby." 10. Naming and Blessing The nurses have collapsed the incubator walls Raised the hood, put up screens around the other babies Even the space empty since this morning's death Allowed more than two visitors Including the men--friends and relatives-- Standing around the incubator left hands on each others' shoulders Right hands under the blankets that cradle Baby David For a rite meant to be greeting not farewell 11. Nancy the Nurse Rocking, gliding peace back and forth in the room "You never get used to this part. If you make it past your second year you're hooked." 12. Leave Taking "I've been asked to be the bouncer," Bishop Pinkston says, Clears the room and invites back in family by family Finally the nurses take David and Sarah to an empty room. They will bring the baby. David comes to the waiting room for cameras Then asks us in. Little David gasps, old man full of wisdom and suffering Nurse checks heartbeat now and then Shift changes Slower and slower and finally gone Returned from his parents to his parents. 13. Funeral And I also beheld, said Joseph, That all children who die before they arrive At the years of accountability Are saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven 14. Grave side Great-great Uncle Don opens with prayer Himself a six-month baby, slept in a shoebox, kept warm in the oven "We lost a premature baby ourselves. I know how you feel." Obituary for David Don Erickson, Jr David Don Erickson, Jr., nicknamed Harley (David's son), left his earthly parents for his Heavenly on July 27, 7:45 p.m. David was born prematurely at UVRMC, one day shy of 24 weeks, 5:19 p.m. July 10 after a week of trying not to be. He was 1 lb 12 oz and 13 inches long, though he lost several ounces and regained a few. The following Sunday, July 14, a life flight crew took him by ambulance to Primary Children's Medical Center for heart surgery to close a duct and prevent backflow from the heart into the lungs. On July 16 as David's mother, Sarah Lian Erickson and her aunt, Donna Clark, were passing Draper en route to Primary Children's, doctors called and told them surgery was about to begin. By the time they pulled into the parking lot surgery was complete, and successful. David would need another surgery for an ostomy bag and another about six months later to complete his digestive system. However, before he could get further surgery David developed yeast, strep and bacterial infections. On Tuesday, July 23, the nurse practitioner stopped David, Sr. and Sarah as they were going in to see their son and told them the infection was not clearing up and they would have to start thinking about disconnecting the life support. Doctors weren't sure they could keep baby David alive long enough for the family to gather from Colorado, where David's father and step-mother were attending a conference, from Texas where Sarah's sister Betty and her new baby, Alizabeth, left the rest of their family, and from southwestern Washington, where Sarah's parents live. But David, Jr waited for them all, received a name and blessing July 27 and returned home early in the evening. He is survived by his father's parents, Joel and Judy Erickson of Moroni, Utah and Lynda Sutherland of Spring City, Utah; by his father's brothers and sisters, Andrew (Meredith), Ben (Sarah), Carolyn (Keith), Eric, Forrest, Greg and Holly; by his mother's parents, Joseph and Marie Lian of Menlo, Washington, her sister Jennifer, also of Menlo, and her sister Betty (Sean) Casey of Ft. Hood, Texas, and by numerous cousins and great aunts and uncles, including his father's great uncle Don, who had also lost a premature baby, and was himself a 6 month baby, slept in a shoe box, kept warm in the oven. The family wishes to thank friends, family, neighbors, doctors and nurses and ward members in Pleasant Grove and Moroni for their kindness and love. Joe, Marie and Jennifer Lian write, "On behalf of David and Sarah we thank you all for your prayers, your sympathy, and support. God shed His grace upon our travels and we got there and back home with no problems. He showed us His mercy and through His Holy Spirit comforted our hearts and souls as we said our good byes. He showed His Love for us by removing snags from our path as we progressed through these tough times, by giving us the strength to stand up and move on with life. He reminded me of what he went through when His Son died. Thank you all, again." So, as Joe said, thank you all again. The godly walk and conversation here means so much to me, even when I'm having computer problems and can't join in. (Hmm, good timing, Kurt Bestor is singing "Prayer of the Children.") Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 08 Aug 2002 00:25:52 -0700 On Tues, 6 Aug 2002 Eric Samuelsen wrote: > I'd suggest some further reading. A great book on welfare > is a recent one, LynNell Hancock's Hands to Work. Barbara > Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed is terrific. There are any > number of far more scholarly works, the titles of which I > can't remember right now. On Wed, 7 Aug 2002 Jacob Proffitt replied: > Why? Are you assuming that my problem is education? That if I > knew what you know that I'd agree with you? That isn't often the > case, as much as it is often the assumption. Or perhaps those books are studies of poverty programs that do work, since an assertion that programs don't work to alleviate poverty implies a request for counter-examples. I can think of two very good examples, micro-credit lending and the Perpetual Education Fund. A year ago this spring I went to the dentist before my newly laid off dental benefits expired. I wondered whether to take Martin Cruz Smith's Stallion Gate or Muhammad Yunus's Banker to the Poor in with me. "Yunus, huh?" the dentist said. "He's speaking over at BYU this week. A man in my ward is one of Muhammad's associates." I've thought it not at all coincidence that within a week of Yunus speaking GBH announced the PEF in conference (ok, to keep up the stream of acronyms I should have written GC). I suspect the Church consulted with Yunus on how to set up and administer the fund, though it's a contrast to what he does as a banker since he feels pretty strongly that the poor don't need training in a skill before they can work their way out of poverty--he doesn't object if they want the training, it just shouldn't be a requirement for receiving credit. ("I firmly believe that all human beings have an innate skill. I call it the survival skill. The fact that the poor are alive is clear proof of their ability." (140)) _Banker to the Poor_ is full of good stories about the poor being able to pull themselves out of poverty through a program, and Pres. Hinckley pretty obviously hopes that his program will do the same for a great many missionaries returning to poor homes and countries. This whole idea of using micro-credit as a way to escape poverty rather than become poorer resonates with someting I wrote last week but didn't send yet, partly because the Money Matters thread is so old, and partly because I wanted to finish my thank you for your prayers and good words on Baby David's behalf before rejoining the list conversation. On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 15:43:56 -0600 "Jacob Proffitt" writes: > ---Original Message From: Ivan Angus Wolfe > > What is odd to me is how this seems to get translated by the > > local leaders (nearly all of whom I've been noticing are > > doctors and lawyers) to "have no debt at all - and invest all > > your money." > > Well, not an entirely inappropriate message. Whether you're a > doctor, lawyer, brick layer, convenience store clerk, computer > programmer, whatever, it's by far best to have no debt at all and > invest as much as you can. > Any debt *is* bad. Even debt on a house isn't a happy thing and is > best avoided. Sure, all things in measure, but with debt, there just > isn't much to recommend it. Debt, like alcohol and cigarettes, is a > way of making short-term, seemingly beneficial decisions that bind > you to long-term detrimental effects. While I don't have much argument with either of these (though I'm hardly debt-free) I do have two comments. Since this thread was running (and my motherboard crashed) we have seen a whole slew of companies join Enron in the list of corporate accounting and other scandals. One of the couples Donna sits on babies for is moving out of the ward. In her farewell sacrament meeting talk the wife said, "I work for WorldCom," and talked about her gratitude at having survived several layoffs, and how when her co-workers talk about benefits being slashed and working for a lousy company she just feels grateful to have a job. They watched Matthew for us one night while we went up to the hospital to see our very ill preemie grandnephew. (Matthew didn't want to go because he's too young to go in and see the baby. He finally got to, before David was taken off life support--very hard for Matthew, he loves babies.) When we came back to get Matthew, she told me she's working several hours a week unpaid for Worldcom, which, of course, is illegal. I don't know if she knows that. Anyway, after thinking about all these big corporations cooking or half-cooking their books, words about the virtues of investing all you can seem a little naive, and I keep remembering the adage, 'Don't invest more than you can afford to lose.' There's a literary aspect to this, if you think about investing and debt as competing social narratives, and think about the narrative strategies people use to try and convince us to do either one, but there's a more direct literary tie-in when I think about Jacob's comment, "Any debt *is* bad." My work requires a computer. If I can't type my stories at home I have to go somewhere where other people also want to use a computer. The travel and waiting for that other computer is not a good use of time, so my wife and sister gave me some money for my birthday, which covered about 40% of the cost of a new computer. I decided to buy it on credit because I would spend less on interest than on gas and time to drive or pedal a disk of stories over to American Fork if I waited to buy until I had all the money. So in that sense I suppose my debt is my investment, the thing that allows me to continue my literary production, and, I hope, get rid of a lot of my other debt. Harlow S. Clark "But if you go out into the real world you cannot miss seeing that the poor are poor not because they are untrained or illiterate but because they cannot retain the returns of their labor. They have no control over capital, and it is the ability to control capital that gives people the power to rise out of poverty." --Muhammad Yunus, _Banker to the Poor_, p. 141. Yunus also said, It is not the poor who are uncreditworthy, but the banks who are unpeopleworthy. ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 08 Aug 2002 07:31:53 -0600 The passage Bill quotes was delivered by Spencer W. Kimball to an audience in South Africa in 1978, by the way. There is an excellent article by Dale LeBaron (who owns the tape) on the subject in a collection of talks given at the Sperry symposium of 1992. The collection is called _The Heavens Are Open_. Now, to Bill's last suggestion--that we shouldn't be arguing over whether or not past prophets made mistakes but should instead be focusing on the marvelous revelation of 1978 and the now open door throughout the world--I do see one problem. Guess what one of the favorite subjects of the anti-Mormons is? If you have an African American friend in the Bible Belt who gets interested in the Church, I can almost guarantee you that he or she will be visited--probably weekly--by well-intentioned anti-Mormon missionaries (often CERTIFIED in their anti-Mormon education), who will proceed to give them every ugly thing past leaders have said about "the Negro race." Can you guess how many of these investigators suddenly quit investigating? Just ask a missionary who has served in Atlanta or Nashville. And ask that missionary what materials they had to help the investigators move past that huge stumbling block. Ask them if they relied on what they had learned in seminary--that Blacks were cursed as descendants of Cain. Sadly, most don't even have Bruce R. McConkie's "I was wrong" talk (actually called "All Are Alike Unto God.") My own feeling is that the time is coming when we will realize how important it is for us to courageously and publicly correct false doctrine which was taught in the past. We are in a marvelous position to welcome MANY saints of African descent. We are not segregated! That's rather exceptional. In most areas, Sunday is the most segregated day of the week. Yet despite that, we have a terrible retention rate, particularly for African Americans. I'm certain Church leaders are looking at the problem. I have full faith that we will be urged towards our potential as a Church, and that prophets will continue to speak and sometimes to reitterate what McConkie said: "[We] were wrong. Forget what ANY CHURCH LEADER SAID ON THIS SUBJECT prior to June 8 1978." [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marie Knowlton Subject: Re: [AML] Education Week Get-Together Date: 08 Aug 2002 09:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Chevy's is an excellent choice. The atmosphere is fun, the food unusual and tasty, and the prices are very reasonable. Would Thursday or Friday night work better for most of us? "Richard R. Hopkins" wrote:Sounds good. Anyone like Chevy's on University right off the I-15? I asked my wife about a date, but she said I'd have to take her or go by myself. Don't know which yet. Richard Hopkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 08 Aug 2002 10:33:42 -0600 Gordon's poetic phrase "good books that go bust, and bad books that break the bank" sounds like something we could put into a song. Of course it's not always true. But it always tickles me to hear that somebody REALLY popular who MADE IT often can't really guess why, (like Elvis Presley who just couldn't figure out why those girls were screaming for him--it had him puzzled). It's like hitting a public nerve. And unfortunately there's no (reliable) formula. Or no way (really) to predict. No one knows why or why not. In my experience all an artist really knows is that he himself in his isolation must do what he must do, and he keeps doing it in the face of opposition, which sometimes includes death. Thanks for the comment, Gordon! Marilyn -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Polemical Style (was: Newspaper Wars) Date: 08 Aug 2002 10:41:26 -0600 Man, oh man, can we really do this, go off on Marianne Jennings?Seriously, = if she's not off-topic, it won't be long until any discussion of her work = becomes off-topic. For starters, she's the worst political columnist ever. = Heaven knows I can't stand Rush Limbaugh, but she makes Rush look like = Molly Ivins. Okay, I tend to think of 'bad' political columnists as = conservatives, but imagine a really extreme, shrill, idiotic liberal = columnist. Imagine the worse one ever. Well, Marianne is worse still. = She's worse even than Pat Buchanan, and that's saying a lot. And I think = she's the worst Mormon writer ever. I know, I know, I'm the original guy = who says there's no such thing as immoral writing, and that 'bad' writing = is very subjective and all that. Toss it all out; no rules apply when it = comes to Marianne Jennings. =20 First of all, I buy the P.J. O'Rourke-Mencken comparison. I quiite enjoy = O'Rourke's travel writing, while reserving my own judgment regarding his = politics, but he's very funny when he wants to be, and has some of = Mencken's bite and wit. But I don't think Marianne Jennings even aspires = to be Mencken. I think she's a Dr. Laura wannabe, or maybe even worse, an = Ann Coulter wannabe. =20 Look, heaven knows I can be excessive and polemical in my writing, = although I really am trying to be fair and reasonable. Maybe that's the = reason I loathe her column so thoroughly, because I see some of my own = worst traits in her writing. Marianne never even tries to be fair or = reasonable. She's pure vitriol, all the time. She just despises = 'liberals,' especially those found in Hollywood or academia. (And, of = course, there are plenty of kooky liberals in Hollywood or academe, I = don't deny that at all). And, here's the thing, I think she thinks she's = funny. I think she thinks that accusing Bert and Ernie of being gay role = models on Sesame Street is funny, that that's what passes for satirical = wit in her particular corner of the political right. But it's funny like = those really aggressive t-shirts you see at county fairs are funny, the = kind that say "I go from zero to horny in 6.8 beers." =20 At the same time, I should say two things about her. I do read her. I = read her column every week. Every Monday, I try to take a double dosage = of my blood pressure medication, because Monday is Marianne day, and I = know I'm going to read her column, even though it's bad for me. She's = sort of fascinating. I do find myself wondering what silly nonsense she's = going to spout (as offensively as possible) this week. =20 And she's an interesting study in a certain segment of contemporary Mormon = society, an interesting study in a certain kind of Mormon conservative. = Now, take Jacob Proffitt as one kind of Mormon conservative. Jacob and I = disagree all the time, but we're still friends. Maybe, if I sat down with = Marianne, I'd feel the same way about her. But it's one thing to have two = people study certain public policy issues and come to different opinions = about them. It's quite another to turn absolutely every dispute and = disagreement ad hominem. There's such an 'us vs. them' streak in = Marianne, and I see that in a certain kind of Mormonism. Such a tremendous= tendency to judge and condemn, which we see sometimes, unfortunately, in = Mormonism. =20 I also think the Deseret News should keep her column. I don't think they = should fire her, or whatever it is you call it when you don't renew a = syndicated columnist. She's so extreme and so nutty that she does my side = more good than hers. I personally know two former conservatives that have = become card-carrying liberal democrat pinkos, solely because of Marianne. = Frankly, she makes all conservatives look like loonies, which conservatives= all aren't, but as a liberal, I find it hard to mind much. Really, those = of you who don't read her column, you're missing a treat. She's out = there. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] "Choose the Rock" Date: 08 Aug 2002 14:46:02 -0700 I have tried to remain neutral here, but my spirit won't let me. I don't know who wrote: >snip > >>With all due respect to the idea of music being neutral--hogwash. >snip But, I couldn't agree more. In my humble opinion- Our senses - sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch, - are what generates what we feel. What we feel is in fact our spirit. Without our spirit, we are just a lump of clay. The spirit is what animates and gives meaning and purpose to our soul (body and spirit combined). Our body may go into idle when we are bored to tears by the umpteenth time we've heard the story of how uncle John caught the biggest fish in the pond, or brother Jones, of the Stake High Council, give his standard talk on repentance. But the only time our body can be in neutral is when our spirit leaves it. The spirit will always be animated, and it is animated to its highest when it is exposed to the things of beauty the senses feed it with. Beautiful music, art and writing, good food, scents, and the tender touch of loved ones. All of these things generate feelings and feeling is what makes the difference between being physically alive and physically dead. When our body is dead our spirit will still respond to most of our senses. So! How could music be neutral? Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: [AML] Re: Invoking Emotions Date: 08 Aug 2002 15:08:03 -0700 Richard R. Hopkins wrote: >snip > There is only one emotion that I believe is not morally or spiritually neutral--anger. >snip What about apathy, boredom, and indifference? To me, these seem to be neutral emotions, and they seem to be negative as far as progression goes. So maybe a better word would be reverse? Anger would be to the far side of the neutral point with hatred at the very extreme end. On the positive side, which leads forward to progression, we have Love, joy, peace, kindness, selflessness, service, and caring. I do not see anything neutral, morally or spiritually about emotions. Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 09 Aug 2002 00:07:00 -0600 Ethan Skarstedt wrote: >>> Of course, if we're certain the Lord ended it, [the ban on blacks and the priesthood] it stands to reason that we are equally sure he started it (or at least approved of it) as well. <<< Are we sure that He started--or even approved of--it in the context of the Restoration? I ask for a couple of reasons. There are a (fairly large, I think) number of times where the Lord has allowed things that he didn't necessarily approve of, and approved of things he didn't necessarily consider to be the best of all possible choices. It seems to me that the Lord has been frustratingly obstinate in requiring that we take a step in His direction before he gives us greater light and knowledge, in the process allowing even his chosen people to continue in inappropriate practices despite his strong desire that they behave otherwise. I'm just not sure that the fact a thing was allowed is the same thing as saying that it was approved or that it originated with the Lord. >>> The church was and is either operating with his blessing and direction or it was and is not, after all. <<< But hasn't the Church and its leaders gone from lesser to greater--and sometimes greater to lesser--understanding over the years and through the dispensations? It seems to me as though we sometimes put too much stock in an idea of infallibility or institutional perfection than is useful--especially when you put imperfect people into the mix. For example, Moses' original intent (and arguably his original command of God) was to bless the children of Israel with the fullness of the covenant and priesthood authority. But based on their weak faith and lack of righteousness a lesser law was implemented--not because the Church was not under the direction and blessing of the Lord, but because the people were not ready. The Lord declared in clear and unequivocal terms that the Saints were to build a great city in Missouri in the 1830s, and that this city would be the New Jerusalem, the City of God. Yet somehow that great city never came to be--not because the Lord didn't declare it possible, but because the Saints were unable to live up to their own best hopes, desires, and expectations. The Lord wasn't wrong when he stated what was possible--it *was* possible if the peoples' hearts and mind had been right. But his words were not fulfilled because of the limits of the people, not the limits of his blessing or direction. The same could be said of the United Order experiments in both Missouri and Utah. It's arguable that the law of tithing was a backup plan to full consecration--aka, a change of policy--not because tithing was the best or most approved solution, but because it was an adequate substitute until the people learned to do better. Allowed and even sanctioned, but not the practice He wanted or asked for. Operating under the blessing and direction of the Lord didn't stop either David or Solomon from messing up, the children of Israel from a great many follies, or the apostacy of the Church after the first coming of Christ. The blessing and direction of the Lord does not equate to infallibility, only to a the best possible chance of success. I think we sometimes conflate the current (often limited) law given to us by the Lord with the perfect (and unchanging) law that has always been our goal. The result is that many feel that any change from the current law (or policy) represents proof either of apostacy or of a false foundation. But they're two completely different things, in my opinion. >>> There are a multitude of reasons that God could have had for blacks being barred from the priesthood that have nothing to do with racism. <<< Absolutely! I don't think anyone has accused God of racism. But I think I have heard speculation that the policy after the Restoration may not have been directed of God, and that the leadership may have used their own wisdom in the absence of specific instruction (which is not the same thing as accusing that leadership of racism, either). It may be that God specifically commanded the early leaders of this dispensation that the priesthood be withheld from the blacks. As it turns out, the general authorities in 1978 believed that there was no such specific commandment, despite the strong personal beliefs of some of them that the policy had been specifically instituted of the Lord, and as a result sought clarification and understanding from the Lord. The understanding they received was that the policy should be changed. Which says absolutely nothing about where the policy came from. While it's fair to assume the policy in this dispensation was instituted of the Lord, I think it's equally fair to assume that it evolved out of the prevailing wisdom of the day with no direct input from the Lord. The closest thing to authoritative statements we have are some of what Elder McConkie said about his own experiences, and the information from Ed Kimball that Margaret Young referred to in her post of 8/7 where she quotes from her forthcoming novel. Both of those sources seem to suggest that the policy was allowed, not commanded. Maybe it doesn't matter, but I would like to know as much truth as I can about this and many other issues so I can develop my own understanding on a basis of knowledge instead of supposition. So I ask the questions and challenge the answers in the hope that I will gain knowledge from all of the people on this list. >>> The fact that some folks are presented with trials different than mine (like being denied the priesthood) means nothing in the long run. <<< Except that I think it does. To me the commandment to share one another's burdens requires that we understand and learn empathy for all kinds of trials that are not our own. Until recently I had never been faced with a trial of poverty, but the last year has taught me a lot of empathy for people that I had very easily dismissed in years gone by. I can learn empathy by my own direct experience or I can attempt to learn it from other peoples' direct experience. I think you're right--the specific trials are largely irrelevant. But what isn't irrelevant is the connections we build one with another, the communities we build and eternal relationships we develop. To build the kingdom of God on earth I believe we need to understand and appreciate the many trials that our brothers and sisters face. One of the ways to gain that understanding is through story--either fiction or essay. There are many stories to be told--stories of rage, patience, acceptance, confusion, ambivalence, and all the other emotions that experience brings to us. Both sharing our own stories and hearing the stories told by others is ultimately to our advantage--even when those stories seem to have no relevance to our own lives. In my opinion. (Not much of a connection to literature, except that to a very real degree I think the stories we tell each other on this list through our individual viewpoints and posts are very much a part of the ongoing dialog of Mormon letters. Frankly, I hope to see novels and stories published in the coming years that touch on some of the things we discuss here; I know that I've been pleased to see Eric Samuelsen use this list to develop some of the ideas he later offered in his plays. I hope others will take up the gauntlet and do the same. I know that our discussion of Mormon utopias and programs for poverty are playing substantial roles in the development of a novel project I'm currently working on. Now if I can only get off the research phase and into the writing phase...) Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ethan Skarstedt" Subject: RE: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 09 Aug 2002 08:43:46 -0600 Me two days ago: "Of course, if we're certain the Lord ended it, it stands to reason that we are equally sure he started it(or at least approved of it) as well." Thom: "Not necessarily. It could have been that the Lord was letting his leaders make their own mistakes and waited until they wised up enough to ask for further light and knowledge." Denying blacks the priesthood was either for their betterment or their detriment it either furthered the plan of salvation or hindered it. I don't find it reasonable to assume that God would have allowed his leaders to implement a policy that hindered his plan of salvation for some of his children so that others of his children could wise up. He is, after all, no respecter of persons. Therefore, the policy furthered the plan and enjoyed his approval while it was extant. ME two days ago: "I don't have a problem with that. There are a multitude of reasons that God could have had for blacks being barred from the priesthood that have nothing to do with racism. The idea of God, the father of us all, being racist is internally absurd." Thom: =20 "But does it necessarily follow that his children, even his chosen leaders, can't be racist on occasion? All of us (even prophets) learn precept by precept." True enough. McConkie's theory as to why blacks were denied the priesthood, as presented in the un-sanitized version of Mormon Doctrine, offended me even when I was a child. In my opinion it was deeply racist. However, I feel I must point out that just because a leader acts according to a false precept, even sin on his part, does not mean that he can foil the plan. I point to Judas as evidence. God can has and will make use of the personal foibles of his leaders to further his purposes. I certainly will not argue that individuals in the church and church leadership are never racist or never wrong in any of a million ways. What bothers me is this notion of "institutional repentance." It always comes down to the individual. The policy against blacks holding the priesthood was not implemented by "the institution". It was implemented by individuals within the institution (as are all policies). If the policy was not divinely inspired (a possibility I am not willing to bet against) some individual came up with the notion, some individual/s failed to point out that it was ludicrous and some (or many) individuals taught it to the rest of the church. If those individuals furthered the notion because they were racist, (regardless of its source) then they need to repent, make restitution, feel remorse, etc. . . Most of them are probably dead today and thus the whole thing is water under the bridge. To call upon "the institution" to repent is to free those _individuals_ of responsibility for their actions and to lay that responsibility at the feet of people who had nothing to do with the whole thing, but simply happen to be part of the same institution. -Ethan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Invoking Emotions Date: 09 Aug 2002 02:43:14 -0700 on 8/7/02 9:09 PM, Thom Duncan at ThomDuncan@prodigy.net wrote: >> There is only one emotion that I believe is not morally or spiritually >> neutral--anger. > > Think about Christ rebuking the folks outside the temple? Joseph Smith > rebuking the guards at Liberty? Strong emotions both. Was the spirit not > present at those times. > > I think Mormons have a misconception that anger is not a Chirst-like > emotion. Anger toward sin and hypocrites -- you can't get more Christ-like > than that. The uncontrolled anger due to pride is the bad kind. > > Thom > This is not so much a Mormon thing as a Comptist thing. Ever since that idiot came up with his positive/negative philosophy it's encroached more and more on thought, literature, etc, etc. Psychology and "therapy" goes along with this idea, and now there are such things as "negative" emotions. Compte's goofy theory is based on electrical positive/negative. Really. Positive and negative are not nearly so useful as good and evil. There is good anger, good hatred, and good passion. There are evil versions of each. I agree with Thom that the difference is entirely a matter of pride. Pride ruins everything good. As with so many other things it becomes a matter of definitions. Hatred has become such a hackneyed word that it means nothing anymore. It can't be good in modern parlance because it has become equated with evil. It's quite difficult to think of a good version of hatred anymore because of its modern usage. I tend to think it's similar to opposition versus competition. In the Yorgason Brother's _Becoming_ they describe the Cheyenne version of opposition and competition. They use Louis Lamour for the example. If he is opposition to another writer then his every improvement and success is a good, making one work ever harder to keep up with him. Competition, the ugly sister of opposition, is much less kindly. If Louis Lamour is competition then what is wished for is his utter defeat. Every clumsy phrase is a triumph, every poor-selling book a victory. Every person who likes his books is an enemy. The same idea is more difficult to apply to hatred because there aren't really two similar words to make splitting hairs easy. Through history war does not always involve hatred. It is possible for either side to admire the other and even be friendly to individual enemy soldiers. This is a reason why pickets often got together in a impromtu swap meet between the lines during the Civil War, or why the Germans invited the British to Christmas Dinner during WWI. Hatred usually comes closer to home. When fighting outside one's own country, with relatively chivalrous enemies, hatred is a little hard to build up and keep rolling. In the Pacific part of WWII I don't doubt that many of the captured Allied soldiers on the Bataan Death March hated the Japanese soldiers passionately. It would be next to impossible to watch the Japanese officers having a beheading contest with your buddies and not hate them. Does that mean that they were evil for feeling hatred? I don't think so. It was an earned hatred. On the same note I'd wager that the many thousands of Korean "comfort women" that were forced to be pretty compliant for Japanese soliders had a hatred every bit as justified. Strangely enough the concept of hatred is undergoing a radical change again right now, moving towards the line I'm describing. Since 9/11 how many different people have said "Why do they hate us?" as if there is some justification for that hatred in something America has done. Though I disagree that America is to blame for all the world's ills, I agree that hatred is not just based on ignorance or fear or pride. It can be entirely justified and right. A couple of years ago they called people like me "Clinton-haters" and assumed naturally that there was no good reason for such hatred. While he was president I never felt any hatred for him, only disgust, though since 9/11 I have hated him for minutes, sometimes even hours at a time. I don't think it comes from evil within me; I prayed daily for the last three years of his presidency that nothing serious would happen, but I never prayed for him to die. I was pretty agitated during the Serbian ruckus and REALLY nervous after the Cole was bombed. I never expected something as big as 9/11 but I expected many hundreds of casualties and prayed that Bush would be able to pull things back together before the bad guys managed another strike. A number of my email/online friends were worried about the same thing; I have friends in several parts of the government and found out lots of things that have only become public recently. I knew that Sudan had made four attempts to give us bin Laden in 1997, which came out only a few months ago in the mainstream media. I do not much worry about this feeling because in terms of what I know about how foreign policy had been so incredibly bungled it is entirely justified. The only thing I want from a president is a good foreign policy--otherwise I want to be left alone. If we have a war then I would expect more, but in peacetime I want Silent Cal. Were this short-term hatred to take an evil turn, however, it would not be a mere feeling. Evil hatred is an action, not a feeling. It has to be stoked, tended, and built up, so that it consumes more than just a few calories and neurons. Vendetta is hatred's avatar, even when justified. Revenge can consume and destroy both avenger and quarry. This is why God said vengeance was His. He knows we'll never be able to balance the scales of justice exactly, and its even more difficult for an ignorant, blind mortal to balance justice and mercy. A hatred that lasts a few moments and burns itself out is not very dangerous. If pride gets a good hold, however, then things like 9/11 happen, or Auschwitz, or the GULAG. The difference is easy to detect. Nazis hate Jews because they are to blame for all the evils in the world. Communists hate the Bourgeoisie because they are to blame for all the evils in the world. Islamists hate Americans because they are to blame for all the evils in the world. The KKK hates Africans because...well you get the idea. On a personal level it works the same way. When you dwell on all the wrongs someone has done you, it begins to swallow up some things that they didn't really do. I unfortunately have experience with this kind as well and I didn't like it at all--afterwards. It was actually quite comforting for a while. For myself the reason I turned away from it is because I really couldn't do anything that would punish the guilty without punishing the innocent along with them. Indeed after considerable research I believe it was only one person who wronged me, and the organization he worked for is only slightly culpable. Since I don't know who he is I can do nothing to hurt him, and since the government wasn't interested I'll literally just have to wait for God to render justice. About six years ago I was not satisfied with that turn of events, but I have reconciled myself to it. After I broke free of this mordant hatred I discovered that I was not so entirely right in my own position. Some things I had blamed on my foe were mistakes of my own, and I just had to swallow the truth. I believe that this is the reason why destructive and evil hatreds are so common and pernicious. Everything one does is justified by hatred. The perpetrators of 9/11 were entirely justified in their own minds. The attribute thousand-year-old wrongs to present-day individuals. They blame America for things that were done centuries before she was a nation. Every evil thing they wish to do is justified by their hatred. As I said, this is not an emotion they feel. It's an active, well-tended, fully grown kind of hatred, and the emotional part was left behind long ago. Just so's ye don't think that I can demonstrate only one example of the first kind of hatred, let me add a second. I hate, above all things, pederasts and pedophiles and rapists. I've been writing them in as bad guys since I was 7 years old. Nonetheless when somebody I knew was accused of molesting a few little boys while teaching them the piano I actually helped him out before his trial--allowed him to buy a computer (modemless, of course) on payments while his trial was going on. It was at the request of his father and I didn't really like doing it though he was of course supposed to be presumed innocent. He was found guilty, and is still in prison last I heard. When I found out that he was guilty I felt the same hatred I always feel when I hear about a child being harmed--but I didn't regret that I had helped him. Whether or not he deserved it I had behaved as justly as I could in my ignorance of the truth. The emotional part did not affect my actions--though if I met such a one in a dark alley it certainly would. Even then it would require incontrovertable evidence, because I can think of nothing worse than to be falsely accused of such a thing. I'm a very big man and any sort of rapist that came afoul of me would not enjoy the experience, even if he survived. No matter what anyone says I could not think that such a thing is evil. Hatred in that sense is entirely justified, and the action might be as well. If it led to torture or mutilation it could not be just, because justice is not really a matter of an eye for an eye. Justice is when somebody guilty of that kind of evil has to face God again with that stain scarlet upon him. As for this world I just want them gone so that nobody, little children particularly, never have to suffer at their hands. A vain wish, but improvements can be made. Ashcroft upped the kiddie porn task force's budget back to pre-Clinton levels and knocked off that vile Candyman ring in less than a year. I don't know that hatred was any part of his motivation, but whether of no, it was a good deed, and by their fruits shall ye know them. Any hatred that bears a good fruit then it ain't an evil. Jim Wilson aka the Laird Jim -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 09 Aug 2002 10:10:01 -0600 I AGREE WITH THOM. God didn't prevent anyone from building the Rameu= mptom tower, but he certainly blessed those who had been excluded by the self-righteousness of the self-exalted, lofty worshippers. I find it= fun to read scriptures with a particular theme or question in mind. Try rea= ding the Book of Mormon to get a message on racism. You might need a little h= elp in the beginning. I'll include an endnote (also early draft) from _Stan= ding on the Promises_. The chapter preceding this depicts Darius's conversio= n and his question about the differences between Nephites and Lamanites. "At the time Darius joined the Church, the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 30= :6) had been modified from its original text to read: =93[The Lamanites] shal= l be a white and delightsome people.=94 The original text (and current one,= which has been revised since 1964) says instead =93pure and delightsome people.= =94 The difference is significant. Because the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 5: 21= ) refers to a =93sore cursing=94 which came upon the =93Lamanites=94, that bei= ng =93a skin of blackness=94, and because of ideas formerly held in much of America a= bout the Curse of Cain or of Canaan, many well-intentioned Mormons (particular= ly in the past) have interpreted dark skin as a signifier of a divine curse. A= curse, however, refers to distance from God. The Hebrew word for =93curse= =94 means =93separate=94 or =93separation.=94 The fact that righteous =93Laman= ites=94 are referred to frequently in the Book of Mormon shows that their skin color is no= t a mark of their separation from God. Hugh Nibley is very clear about =93thi= s race business in the Book of Mormon=94 (Teachings of the Book of Mormon Se= mester 1 Transcripts p. 286). As he describes the cultural interpretation of =93blackness=94 and =93whiteness,=94 he discusses paintings in Greece= and Egypt, and suggests that =93the people who live in...'the houses of hair, out in= the desert are always painted with dark complexions. The people who live in...= =92the houses of stone=92 are always depicted with light complexions. The w= omen never went out; they would paint their faces with white lead, as a matter o= f fact. It=92s a cultural thing.=94 He suggests that the Book of Mormon refer= ences to skin color have more to do with lifestyle than any divine mark. =93[R]aci= al change,=94 he says, =93isn=92t necessary for this at all. After all, they [the = Nephites and Lamanites] are members of the same family; we know that=94 (p. 287). = In other words, the Lamanites, who were hunters in the wilderness (2 Nephi 5:2= 4), had a lifestyle which naturally gave them darker skin than their Nephite br= others, who are described as being studious, =93priests and teachers=94=96an = indoor people (2 Nephi 5:26). (End of endnote). In addition, it's necessary to remember that t= he Book of Mormon is essentially a FAMILY HISTORY. Nephi interprets what he = sees from his own expectations, perceptions, and traditions. That doesn't say = he isn't often inspired, but we're on very thin ice when we suggest that every= thing ANYONE says--even a prophet--is consistently inspired. Anti-Mormons = love to tell potential Mormons what Joseph Smith said about all those Quakers= on the moon. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 09 Aug 2002 10:30:25 -0600 Bill Willson wrote: > Isn't this the Lords plan to teach every kindred tongue and people the plan > of salvation and the gospel of Jesus Christ? > > This is what we need to be writing about instead of arguing over whether or > not our early prophets made any mistakes. Of course they made mistakes. We > all do. That is what we are here for. No mortal, save Jesus, was ever on > this earth in a perfect state of grace. We come to earth to learn how to > apply principles of righteousness. The process of learning requires that we > make mistakes, and hopefully we learn from those mistakes. Even Joseph Smith was called to repentence, and even a young Jesus grew in stature and wisdom day by day. Just a clarification on my own stance here--I don't believe the early Church leaders made mistakes on the priesthood ban so much as they acted in good faith based on what they understood. But I also believe that knowledge was incomplete. They relied on a prior understanding in the absense of specific instructions on the matter. It was not a question that they felt necessary to take to the Lord, and so they were not instructed of the Lord on the issue. Perhaps the policy was allowed by the Lord, perhaps it was even supported, and perhaps it was specifically commanded; we don't really know, because the documentary history we have access to doesn't appear to contain evidence of a direct command of the Lord--only the explications of the understandings of his servants when asked. But as has been pointed out before, the policy is now different and that's all that really matters. (My personal opinion is that whatever limits were placed on who held the priesthood in former dispensations--and the reasons for those limits--are very interesting and important to know if we are to understand the overall development of the Church, but are also largely irrelevant to how we do business in this dispensation. For a while the Levitical priesthood was only available through the direct bloodline of Aaron--but not any more. Somewhere between then and now the decision was made to take the gospel not only to a chosen bloodline, but to take it to all the world. Paul taught--and presumably bestowed authority on--many congregations of foreigners. When the gospel was restored again to Joseph Smith, the last limits on offering the blessings of the gospel to the world were eliminated; a new covenant was made that supplanted all previous limits and conditions. In the case of the blacks and the priesthood, I suspect an understanding of the old covenant interfered with understanding of the new one and led to some policies that were allowed by, but not specifically commanded by the Lord--at least not as part of the new covenant. When the hearts of the people--all the people, not just the Mormons--had changed sufficiently that the Lord's authorized servants sought a confirmation of their righteous desires to change a policy that no longer seemed to make sense to them, the policy changed and with it greater light and power came into the world. This is a pattern that has been repeated many times in the history of the world, and we believe that yet more transforming knowledge will be revealed to us in the coming years.) No blame, no recrimination. We went from a state of less knowledge to a state of greater knowledge, from a less fully implemented covenant to a more fully implemented one--a pattern that has recurred throughout time. To ridicule or dismiss the early leaders of this dispensation for their understanding and the policies that came out of it is as silly as mocking Moses for the sins of the children of Israel or mocking Galileo for the fact that Einstein extended and replaced parts of his understanding. Line upon line, depending on our ability to understand and execute on that understanding. The ban on the priesthood is a fact that is every bit as much a part of our history and theological development as polygamy, the Word of Wisdom, the United Order, the establishment of the New Jerusalem in Jackson County, or any number of other policies or programs that have been offered and changed over the the years. The fact of this change and the revelation of new doctrine, policy, and practice, is a critically important aspect of our religion and has nothing to do with whether leaders are perfect, whether their understanding is perfect, or whether the Lord is changing the game part way through. As I understand it, the covenant has been the same from the beginning; we've just been given access to more or less of it at different times and places depending on our overall (and sometimes individual) righteousness. The fact that a policy changes or that the Church functions differently--or is even organized differently--has no bearing on the Lord's unchangeability, only our own understanding and ability to implement his perfect plan with our imperfect knowledge. But many people struggle with the idea that a change in Church policy somehow casts all prior policies in shadow and the people that implemented those policies in doubt. It's certainly one of the favorite tools of the anti-Mormon crowd. So it seems to me that one of the best things we could do as an organization is to directly and specifically address some of those substantial changes in policy in our internal educational programs. It's a stumbling block that I believe is best removed by direct address; the best way to stop the bickering is for an authoritative arbitrator to issue an authoritative statement. IMO. I don't believe asking for that direct education is a criticism of either the current or previous leadership. I offer a suggestion based on my (quite incomplete) understanding of a problem and my desire to solve it. By asking the question and offering a (quite incomplete) suggestion for a solution I hope to spur greater minds and brighter lights to address what I believe is a real problem in the modern Church. In the meantime, I try to gather knowledge and understanding as well as I can. And because I want to share what I've learned and to learn more, I talk about it. A few months ago the question was asked on this list whether anyone had written stories that they later wanted to repent of. The general response was that no, few authors thought that they should be asked to repent of their earlier work--that instead they grew and expanded. And if their later work refuted some of their own earlier work, it only proved that they had changed (and hopefully grown) over the years. Each of us is a storyteller. The fact that at 38 years old I have very different stories to tell than I did at age 23 doesn't require that I hate, mock, or pity my younger self. At 60 I hope that I will have very different stories to tell than I have now--and if those stories are not a little better and more complete, I will be very, very disappointed. But my knowledge of the fact (likelihood? possibility?) of future growth should not stop me from telling the stories I have now to best of my ability and with the greatest vigor I can. FWIW. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tait Family" Subject: Re: [AML] Request for Prayers Date: 09 Aug 2002 11:49:59 -0700 If you'll indulge a personal note on a personal note, I feel compelled to respond to this thread. My grandmother, Wanda Snow Petersen (whom I have mentioned as having been a friend of Virginia Sorenson and Sam Taylor) died early this morning. She suffered a stroke three weeks ago, a week before my children and I returned to Texas after a month-long visit. We had arrived in late June, just in time for a wonderful 90th birthday celebration, which she, and we, enjoyed very much. Truly there are not many left like Grandma anymore. Her parents were both children of polygamy. She grew up on a dirt farm in Wellington, Utah, and mostly raised her own family there, too. No running water or electricity in their home until the mid-1940s, and then the new house burned down and they had to start over. Grandpa had a debilitating stroke in 1956, and the next year they sold the farm and moved to American Fork, where Grandma dug right in as a much-loved elementary school teacher and president of everything she ever joined (including Pen Women and League of Utah Writers). She was gifted with children, with a firm sense of what their limits and opportunities ought to be--something that is rare indeed. After she retired in 1977, she traveled--China, the South Seas, Russia, Israel, Scandinavia, a semester abroad in London and Europe with BYU students young enough to be her grandchildren. We were forever picking her up and dropping her off at the airport. She wrote letters and brought home gifts and we all gathered for the obligatory slide show. The other thing she did after she retired was write. She wrote her autobiography and then book after book about various ancestors and family stories. In this, perhaps, she was the most typical of all Mormon writers--answering the charge to preserve our family histories, always mindful to show the faith and virtues of our forebears. She financed publication of her books by taking out loans--virtually the only enterprise that she ever borrowed money for. She tried to sell them, but I am sure she ended up paying back most of the loans herself. She leaves no estate of any monetary value, but that's because she spent her earthly wealth on things of much greater value. She used to tell us, 'I'd rather give you money for something important now than save it up for when I die." Grandma was my mother in many respects--my own mother, her daughter, being unwell. As I have mourned this week, I have not taken comfort in the scriptures or in prayer as much as I have found solace in poetry. Gerard Manley Hopkins: "Margaret are you grieving/over golden grove unleaving?.../Tis the blight man was born for/ Tis Margaret you mourn for." And Seamus Heaney's exquisite sonnets "Clearances," written at his mother's death: "Then she was dead,/ The searching for a pulsebeat was abandoned/And we all knew one thing by being there./The space we stood around had been emptied/ Into us to keep, it penetrated/ Clearances that suddenly stood open. / High cries were felled and a pure change happened." Thanks for listening. Lisa Tait -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: RE: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 09 Aug 2002 15:13:56 -0600 Barbara wrote: I think I'm glad I'm no longer teaching English at a university. I also think that if I never hear the word "post-modernism" again, it won't be too soon. One of my BYU students said in class that Postmodernism, if taught correctly and understood correctly, could really teach people humility, since one of the main ideas contained in postmodern perspectives is the fact that human knowledge can't really grasp truth. This student said that people who think they can use their intellect to come to a true knowledge of things are basically trusting in the arm of flesh. I think that young woman was right. I also told her and the whole class that Moroni's take on language is just like Derrida's. He said that the Book of Mormon would be more accurate if it hadn't been translated so many times in the writing process. The Book of Mormon has missing texts, fragments, and Borgesian compilor/editor as a central authoring identity, and nested, interlocking narratives (especially in the Book of Mosiah -- track all the narrator shifts in the book, I dare you. I did it once, and it was really cool). I sure am glad that I DO teach in a university. That way I get to hear the word "postmodernism" once or twice every day, if I'm lucky. Then when I go home for Family Home Evening and discuss Michael Ondaatje, Andrew Goldsworthy, and Jasper Johns with my wife, or talk Francis Bacon (the painter) with my bishop during a temple recommend interview, I can feel like I'm already up to speed. More postmodernism please, that way I'll be humble enough to do anything. -- Todd -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fred C Pinnegar Subject: Re: [AML] Invoking Emotions Date: 09 Aug 2002 17:32:34 -0600 (MDT) And that is my favorite picture of Him--knoting those cords and working up a good solid streak of righteous indignation to go after those guys in the temple. Reminds me of a line from a great poem by Rob Carney called "That Bad . . . God from the old days appeared to me in the form of a 40-gallon hat:" He says "Stand warned: I've been diagnosed "predisposed," meaning likely not to put up with crap." Infinitely better than those pictures of the young girl Jesus preaching to the elders in the temple that the nineteenth century loved or Jesus the Viking, as Arthur Henry King called him, in the red robe. As the Carney poem suggests, there is something Old Testamentish--as it properly should be, given our understanding of Jehovah--about Christ that we must reconcile with any perception of him as the Prince of Peace. Fred Pinnegar > > There is only one emotion that I believe is not morally or spiritually > > neutral--anger. > > Think about Christ rebuking the folks outside the temple? Joseph Smith > rebuking the guards at Liberty? Strong emotions both. Was the spirit not > present at those times. > > I think Mormons have a misconception that anger is not a Chirst-like > emotion. Anger toward sin and hypocrites -- you can't get more Christ-like > than that. The uncontrolled anger due to pride is the bad kind. > > Thom > > > > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 09 Aug 2002 17:59:40 -0600 ---Original Message From: Harlow Clark > > On Tues, 6 Aug 2002 Eric Samuelsen wrote: > > I'd suggest some further reading. A great book on welfare is a > > recent one, LynNell Hancock's Hands to Work. Barbara Ehrenreich's > > Nickel and Dimed is terrific. There are any number of far more > > scholarly works, the titles of which I can't remember right now. > > On Wed, 7 Aug 2002 Jacob Proffitt replied: > > > Why? Are you assuming that my problem is education? That if I > > knew what you know that I'd agree with you? That isn't often the > > case, as much as it is often the assumption. > > Or perhaps those books are studies of poverty programs that > do work, since an assertion that programs don't work to > alleviate poverty implies a request for counter-examples. Based on their titles, they appear to be about how poor people are subject to lots of costs that keep them poor. Not that I object to the premise that people have a lot they have to pay for, but I'm not likely to move from there to the corollary that those costs are responsible for keeping people poor. And I'm not saying I *won't* read them. In my own, brash way that was my attempt to solicit more information about the books to clarify the intent and usefulness of reading them (and stating factors that would play against possible assumptions). Looking at it now, it looks more challenging than I meant it to be, though accurate. > I can think of two very good examples, micro-credit lending and > the Perpetual Education Fund. A year ago this spring I went > to the dentist before my newly laid off dental benefits > expired. I wondered whether to take Martin Cruz Smith's > Stallion Gate or Muhammad Yunus's Banker to the Poor in with me. Two wonderful programs. Again, though, my point is that the key to escaping poverty isn't the program, but the change of heart. And I'm rethinking that point, really. I mean that might be well and good in the United States, but I think both the Perpetual Education Fund and micro-loans are good examples of programs that depend first on people changing themselves, then leverages their determination to lift themselves out of poverty. In other words, it seems to me that the people couldn't escape poverty without the programs and can with them. That indicates an inability to leave poverty without that aid. Pretty convincing. I think it's less applicable for those of us who live in the United States, but it certainly undermines my fundamental argument that programs *can't* be key in the process. The right attitude has to exist--that's crucial and without it no program is going to be successful. But I'm thinking that there are instances where the right attitude is not enough and some outside assistance is needed. I'm relatively confident that such assistance is not needed in the U.S. with our higher wages and existing infrastructure, but since my fundamental argument needs amendment, I'm not opposed to amending further. One fundamental I *will* hold on to is that any program that desires to help the poor escape poverty needs to be down in the trenches with them, understand the situation thoroughly, and bring motivation and attitude into the decision-making process (all of which are fundamental to micro-loans and the PEF). > On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 15:43:56 -0600 "Jacob Proffitt" > > writes: > > ---Original Message From: Ivan Angus Wolfe > > > What is odd to me is how this seems to get translated by > the local > > > leaders (nearly all of whom I've been noticing are doctors and > > > lawyers) to "have no debt at all - and invest all your money." > > > > Well, not an entirely inappropriate message. Whether you're a > > doctor, lawyer, brick layer, convenience store clerk, computer > > programmer, whatever, it's by far best to have no debt at all and > > invest as much as you can. > > > > > Any debt *is* bad. Even debt on a house isn't a happy thing and is > > best avoided. Sure, all things in measure, but with debt, > there just > > isn't much to recommend it. Debt, like alcohol and cigarettes, is a > > way of making short-term, seemingly beneficial decisions that bind > > you to long-term detrimental effects. > > While I don't have much argument with either of these (though > I'm hardly > debt-free) I'm not debt-free, either. My comments are at least partially aimed at myself. > Anyway, after thinking about all these big corporations > cooking or half-cooking their books, words about the virtues > of investing all you can seem a little naive, and I keep > remembering the adage, 'Don't invest more than you can afford > to lose.' I'm not advocating that we invest blindly, and I'm not saying that investing is some panacea that is good all by itself. I'll attempt to clarify: First, all debt is bad, but sometimes situations arise where you have to choose bad vs. worse. More on that below where you make that same argument. Second, investing is a good idea, but not everything we call investing is good. Unfortunately, many people approach investing in such a way that they might just as well be playing the lottery. "Real" investing means allocating your money wisely. After debts are paid and needed living expenses, some money should go to savings for liquidity in emergencies. Some should go to planned future expenses. All of it should be engaged with a goal in mind and placed accordingly. Money is a big part of our lives and I've come to assume that God means us to learn essential lessons from things that large. Personally, I think the lessons involved (in learning how money works) concern overcoming ignorance, fear, and/or greed. Overcoming ignorance, fear, and greed is hard, but required by wise stewardship. As such, our financial decisions should be based on our understanding, our future needs, and our current assets. > There's a literary aspect to this, if you think about > investing and debt as competing social narratives, and think > about the narrative strategies people use to try and convince > us to do either one, but there's a more direct literary > tie-in when I think about Jacob's comment, "Any debt *is* bad." > > My work requires a computer. If I can't type my stories at > home I have to go somewhere where other people also want to > use a computer. The travel and waiting for that other > computer is not a good use of time, so my wife and sister > gave me some money for my birthday, which covered about 40% > of the cost of a new computer. I decided to buy it on credit > because I would spend less on interest than on gas and time > to drive or pedal a disk of stories over to American Fork if > I waited to buy until I had all the money. So in that sense I > suppose my debt is my investment, the thing that allows me to > continue my literary production, and, I hope, get rid of a > lot of my other debt. Like I said above, there are a lot of things that are bad and sometimes we must choose between them. Debt for capital investment (as in a computer) is sometimes warranted. I don't regret the student loans accumulated for my education (well, the *amount* wasn't justified, but the fact of them was). I *do* regret frivolous expenses that have been added to my debt load. It wouldn't have been bad to forgo a DVD player a couple of months so I entered a bad debt with no counter-balancing worse (not being able to watch DVDs hardly counts as a bad thing, really). Not being able to make a living, or having to undergo the costs of training for another career might very well be bad enough to offset the bad of having some additional debt. Maybe. My main point is that we acknowledge that debt is bad and that we not make financial decisions in ignorance or based on fear or greed. The biggest trouble with making those trade-offs is that too many people aren't sufficiently aware of the price of debt. The payments *seem* to be small and the benefits seem large. It can *seem* to be a good thing and worth entering, but too often there is insufficient weight given to future costs. > "But if you go out into the real world you cannot miss seeing > that the poor are poor not because they are untrained or > illiterate but because they cannot retain the returns of > their labor. They have no control over capital, and it is the > ability to control capital that gives people the power to > rise out of poverty." --Muhammad Yunus, _Banker to the Poor_, > p. 141. Yunus also said, It is not the poor who are > uncreditworthy, but the banks who are unpeopleworthy. I'm wondering what Yunus thinks is keeping people from controlling capital? Why can't people control the returns of their labor? Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Polemical Style (was: Newspaper Wars) Date: 09 Aug 2002 19:26:30 -0600 ---Original Message From: Eric R. Samuelsen > > Marianne never even tries to be fair or reasonable. > She's pure vitriol, all the time. I'm a little concerned that we fall into the same errors we attribute to others. I think Marianne Jennings is too polemic. She sometimes is deceptive and I certainly wish she'd moderate herself to, well, the truth. But this statement goes too far. Nobody is pure vitriol all the time and I would hope that our criticisms not only attempt to be accurate but kind as well. Her columns misrepresent others, true, and assume the worst from others and she engages in unwarranted alarmism that I disagree with wholly. The lesson there is that, even if you disagree with her you don't partake of the same faults of exaggeration and misrepresentation. > She just despises > 'liberals,' especially those found in Hollywood or academia. > (And, of course, there are plenty of kooky liberals in > Hollywood or academe, I don't deny that at all). And, here's > the thing, I think she thinks she's funny. I think she > thinks that accusing Bert and Ernie of being gay role models > on Sesame Street is funny, that that's what passes for > satirical wit in her particular corner of the political > right. But it's funny like those really aggressive t-shirts > you see at county fairs are funny, the kind that say "I go > from zero to horny in 6.8 beers." I don't think she thinks its funny at all. If she did, she wouldn't prevent her children from watching Sesame Street. She's in earnest, as much as others think that's funny. At least, as much as I can gauge her motivation. > At the same time, I should say two things about her. I do > read her. I read her column every week. Every Monday, I try > to take a double dosage of my blood pressure medication, > because Monday is Marianne day, and I know I'm going to read > her column, even though it's bad for me. She's sort of > fascinating. I do find myself wondering what silly nonsense > she's going to spout (as offensively as possible) this week. Again, I think this is a mischaracterization. She may state things as extreme as possible (I think that might be true), but I don't think she is trying to be as *offensive* as possible at all. For one, I think she could be a lot more offensive if she wanted. I'd be willing to bet that I could take any article of hers you name and rewrite it to be more offensive (without resorting to anything that'd keep it from being published, either). > And she's an interesting study in a certain segment of > contemporary Mormon society, an interesting study in a > certain kind of Mormon conservative. Now, take Jacob > Proffitt as one kind of Mormon conservative. Jacob and I > disagree all the time, but we're still friends. Maybe, if I > sat down with Marianne, I'd feel the same way about her. But > it's one thing to have two people study certain public policy > issues and come to different opinions about them. It's quite > another to turn absolutely every dispute and disagreement ad > hominem. There's such an 'us vs. them' streak in Marianne, > and I see that in a certain kind of Mormonism. Such a > tremendous tendency to judge and condemn, which we see > sometimes, unfortunately, in Mormonism. See, in my opinion, I think more Mormon conservatives are like me than like you describe here. I think that those who judge and condemn are a small minority (though a vocal one). Now, you (Eric) are in a situation where you are vulnerable to those willing to judge and condemn and you have to be hyper-aware of them. I can understand being sensitive and wishing they'd disappear altogether. That's a worthwhile goal and probably achievable, though hard. Still, I *do* believe it is a small minority and that Mormons are, on whole, more accepting of others and kind than the surrounding general population. We might suffer from a degree of provincialism here in Utah, but that's understandable and something we'll overcome--because we're willing to listen to others and learn new things about them. And I'd like to see that reflected in our art. It takes a certain amount of confidence to be LDS--if only because we insist that people have their own testimonies. As such we tend to have strong opinions and to express them relatively freely (again, compared to the overall population). But I also think that, due to the gospel emphasis on charity and service, we are also more kind and forgiving than our rhetoric would seem to indicate if seen only on the surface. > I also think the Deseret News should keep her column. I > don't think they should fire her, or whatever it is you call > it when you don't renew a syndicated columnist. She's so > extreme and so nutty that she does my side more good than > hers. I personally know two former conservatives that have > become card-carrying liberal democrat pinkos, solely because > of Marianne. Frankly, she makes all conservatives look like > loonies, which conservatives all aren't, but as a liberal, I > find it hard to mind much. Really, those of you who don't > read her column, you're missing a treat. She's out there. I read her occasionally, but on Jewish World Review. Personally, if she's carried in the Deseret News, I'd rather that they replace her with Linda Chavez, Michelle Malkin, or Kathleen Parker (assuming they don't carry them now). Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 09 Aug 2002 19:35:36 -0600 Thom: "Not necessarily. It could have been that the Lord was letting his leaders make their own mistakes and waited until they wised up enough to ask for further light and knowledge." Denying blacks the priesthood was either for their betterment or their detriment it either furthered the plan of salvation or hindered it. I don't find it reasonable to assume that God would have allowed his leaders to implement a policy that hindered his plan of salvation for some of his children so that others of his children could wise up. ME: God probably would have preferred we had done it differently. But we all learn line upon line precept upon precept. Study the history of revelations to the prophets. Few of them occur without the prophet asking a question first. (Joseph Smith and the WoW comes to mind). Hence, it is reasonable to assume that God lets prophets handle mortality the same way we rank and file do -- getting only as much revelation as we ask for. YOU: He is, after all, no respecter of persons. ME: But he would be if he gave prophets a different set of rules than he does us. If he didn't allow them to make mistakes but allowed us then he would be a respecter of persons. YOU: Therefore, the policy furthered the plan and enjoyed his approval while it was extant. OR: His mortal leaders, cursed with the same weaknesses of all Natural Man, just din't ask. Thom: "But does it necessarily follow that his children, even his chosen leaders, can't be racist on occasion? All of us (even prophets) learn precept by precept." Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 09 Aug 2002 23:18:03 -0600 Ethan Skarstedt wrote: >>>Denying blacks the priesthood was either for their betterment or their detriment it either furthered the plan of salvation or hindered it. <<< This is, I think, the crux of where you and I disagree. I'm not convinced that all things happen for reasons; that's more of a deterministic approach than I'm really comfortable with. To me a lot of things happen just because they happen, with no good reason for it other than the motivations of individuals seeking their individual goals--even in the Church, and sometimes even among the leaders of the Church. Which says nothing about inspiration, the influence and power of the Lord, the inherent goodness of people or any of those kinds of things. It only says that I believe that the Lord has far less direct involvement in the daily affairs of men than I think we sometimes give him credit for. I think a lot of stuff just happens and part of the test of this life is to see how we will react under stress. People do things that impact other people, and the Lord chooses to allow that free interplay of action and reaction in order to truly allow us the agency to make choices free of artificial constraints. Otherwise I have to wonder what the Lord was thinking when he allowed (aka, caused or supported or approved) the Crusades, the Inquisition, Hitler, and 9/11. But because I believe these things were conceived of by men and allowed by God in order to prove us as to whether we will follow his will, I accept that ugly stuff happens and that God will eventually make righteous judgment in the eternities for the ugly souls that created such mayhem. Which is not to compare the early leaders of the Church to Hitler, but rather to illustrate extreme examples of horrible events that shattered lives that were nonetheless allowed to happen so that Man could struggle with them and either find or reject God. I remember a tearful testimony from a good woman who was certain that God was testing her by causing her cat to be run over by a bus. While I believe that God allowed the bus to hit the cat (because the cat had wandered into a busy street and one of the natural consequences is a radically increased chance of being run over), I don't believe for an instant that God picked the cat up and put it under the wheels of the bus. I don't think God works that way; it's too intrusive and has too much impact on individual agency. Which is part of why I have no problem with the idea that a policy could be implemented with no direct input from the Lord. Allowed, but I don't accept that allowance is the same thing as approval. >>> To call upon "the institution" to repent is to free those _individuals_ of responsibility for their actions and to lay that responsibility at the feet of people who had nothing to do with the whole thing, but simply happen to be part of the same institution. <<< I don't see how. We cannot free anyone of their own responsibility, but we can seek to actively repair the injuries they caused--to our own benefit. I think maybe the title of this thread is a little unfortunate, because I absolutely agree that the institution itself has little ability to either sin or repent. But the individuals within the institution made choices that the rest of us now inherit as a legacy. Damage was done, whether with good intent or not. Now we as individuals within the institution have the ability to directly address that damage, and to directly soothe some of the residual pain. One of the many ways I think that people within the institution can build a better future is by acknowledging the pain that past policies caused, recognizing that the change in policy requires both a change in thought and in action, and doing what we can right now to fellowship those who still struggle with a legacy of the past. Even unto the third and the fourth generations. I grant that repentence may be the wrong word. Maybe it's just determined effort to understand how tomorrow should be different than yesterday. But to make that choice we have to understand both today and yesterday, in my opinion. That requires that we study not only our successes, but also our failures and that we constantly check our current actions against our best hopes and desires. Whether the policy was right or justified, it has changed. Now I believe it's our job to heal a rift within our community and to do what we can to build the community that could have existed if the policy had been different. To abuse a metaphor, we may not have polluted the lake but we inherited it in a less than perfect condition. Failing to pollute it further will allow natural processes to eventually restore it to natural cleanliness. But actively working to repair the lake will result in cleaner water, faster. Which may allow a generation to taste pure water that otherwise would have known improving, but still impure, water. Which is to the ultimate good of us all. FWIW. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Jan Karon's Mitford Series Date: 10 Aug 2002 02:11:46 -0600 I finished the most recent book, _In This Mountain_, a few weeks ago. It felt as though I had been waiting for it for a very long time, because = the one before it was unsatisfying to me, and the one before that (where the Kavanaughs are spending a year on an island) was not my favorite, despite being very good. This latest book was beautifully moving. Yes, I love the series. Having grown up in various places around the country, I have always been a sucker for books that capture the heart and spirit of one single place, because I have never had that. My family finally settled down--and I left for college three months later. So I = have younger siblings who have a hometown, and I wonder sometimes at how different their growing-up has been. Visiting Mitford, even though it is imaginary, is like having a little bit of that for myself. I understand that some readers see the books as overly sweet at times, = but I honestly can't see it myself. If I were comparing it to other kinds of stories, maybe, but it is exactly what it needs to be for the kind of fiction it wants to be. If anything, the series is *less* sweet than its LDS counterparts. I like the way faith is integrated into the lives of = the characters, though the difference in how it's expressed from the way I understand faith is both a joy and a shock. (I don't think I'll ever get used to the scenes where someone makes a profession of faith; it's = obvious that the form and the language are extremely important, but not having = been raised Episcopalian the exact importance escapes me.) I read the first book...actually I don't remember why I read the first = book; probably because it was very popular at the time. What surprised me is = how well it worked as a devotional tool. This is different from = faith-promoting literature in that the books give me a focus for thinking about spiritual things, rather than telling me how I should practice my religion. = Probably it's different for readers from a Protestant background. I've often wondered what it would be like to be a Mormon in that little community. There doesn't seem to be a lot of room there, with three main religions vying for turf already. I think anyone wanting to write popular LDS fiction might want to take a look at this series. The religious aspects are expressed in much the = same way that they are in Mormon novels, but Jan Karon takes a slightly = different approach to characterization and description that keeps her books from = being just another collection of wacky characters. And, as I said above, she clearly has a love for the country she's writing about that I don't think= is really an aspect of popular Mormon lit, at least so far; those novels = tend to be so much about community that the setting takes a back seat. (This does not apply so much to literary fiction, of course.) I wouldn't mind seeing some popular fiction written by someone living outside Utah, in = which the landscape plays a dominant role in the shape of the Mormon community. Melissa Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Request for Prayers Date: 10 Aug 2002 11:17:07 -0600 Lisa, I knew Wanda in the Utah Writers' League, and I was so interested and impressed with your wonderful tribute to her. She was a wonderful lady. Thank you for writing this! Marilyn Brown ----- Original Message ----- > If you'll indulge a personal note on a personal note, I feel compelled to > respond to this thread. My grandmother, Wanda Snow Petersen (whom I have > mentioned as having been a friend of Virginia Sorenson and Sam Taylor) died > early this morning. [snip] > > Lisa Tait -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Jewish Writers as Role Models (was: Chaim Potok Dies) Date: 10 Aug 2002 20:17:12 -0700 (PDT) --- harlowclark@juno.com wrote: >I have a particular interest in authors who are cast out > or off by their culture. > > The deep irony is that those are often the writers people outside the > culture look to for a sympathetic portrait of the culture. I read Roth's > _Goodbye Columbus_ as a teenager and found it a moving, sympathetic > portrait of Jewish Life. I particularly love "Eli the Fanatic." I know > some people object strongly to his portraying American Jews as bigots > for > their treatment of eastern European refugee Jews in that story and > elsewhere. Others object to his portraying the immigrants as > superstitious. Philip Roth has been on something of a roll during the '90's, publishing one masterpiece after another and establishing himself as America's greatest living novelist (in my humble opinion.) Interestingly, he has also dragged himself--kicking and screaming, to be sure--back somewhat into the fold. His recent work has rediscovered virtue in contemporary Judaism and America. Check out his "American Pastoral", a scathing critique of '60's radicalism. In a post-9/11 interview, he said he was reading "The Federalist Papers" and the political thought of the Founders. That's not exactly the cutting-edge avant-garde fare one might expect him to mention. But there has always been a war in Roth between propriety and wildness. The bloody spectacle of the battle is what makes him so great. > > I'm slowly reading IBS's book of stories about post-war refugees (the > same group early Potok and Roth wrote about) _Passions_ ("While I hope > and pray for the redemption and the resurrection, I dare say that, for > me, these people are all living right now. In literature, as in our > dreams, death does not exist."), and the odd thing is that Singer > portrays these people with all their folk ways and superstitions, and > the > tension between them and American Jews, and no one worries about it. > _Enemies: A Love Story_ (I love the Yiddish title Sonim [I think]: Die > Geschichte fun a Liebe.) is also a fine piece, especially in its picture > of how the survivors went about finding each other, things like > advertising in Yiddish newspapers, and some of the consequences of that > finding. > > I haven't read _Shadows on the Hudson_ yet (got my copy at American Fark > DI May 3, 2001 for $2), which takes place in 1947-49, and was published > serially in Yiddish in The Forward in '57 & '58 but an NPR reviewer said > that Singer wouldn't allow it to be published in English during his > lifetime because it was such a bitter novel and he was trying to > cultivate a gentle grandfatherly image. The reviewer also felt the book > wouldn't add much to Singer's reputation. > "Shadows on the Hudson" is by far Singer's darkest book, darker even than "The Penitent" or "Enemies". In his earlier books he only glancingly dealt with the Holocaust; in "Shadows", every characters life has been shattered by it. Singer combined exalted mysticism with the blackest pessimism. His story "Gimpel the Fool" is very close to scripture for me; it's an explanation of the world that has eternal resonance. Both Singer and Roth are great role models for LDS writers. I would love to see a Mormon Roth wickedly satirize American culture; I would love to see a Mormon Singer pierce the veil and combine heaven and earth. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: [AML] PAYNE & PERRY, _Family - A Joyful Proclamation!_ Date: 09 Aug 2002 18:19:49 -0600 Hi AML Folks, I've been reduced to being an occasional lurker by the demands of our most recent project, but it is out (on CD at least, cassette and songbook soon to follow) and available at a discount for those thrifty-types who drop in on the website. It'll be in bookstores in about two weeks. "Family - A Joyful Proclamation!" has been a labor of love for several years for both me and fellow list member Marvin Payne, whose "kid translation" of the LDS Church's "Family: A Proclamation to the World" was the inspiration for finding the warmth, the relationships, and the joy that beat in the heart of that document. (Maybe he can tell you more about that sometime.) "Family" is a new musical presentation for chorus, soloists, and readers, and touched with everything from Celtic melodies to African percussion and Cajun guitar riffs and accordian. We've had fun and I hope you break out in a big smile the first time you put it on. You can read the full lyrics, see the cover, hear an audio sample or two (whatever I have time to put up today) and order for about $4 off store prices from www.StevenKappPerry.com Thanks for allowing the horn tootin', :-) Steve -- skperry@mac.com http://www.stevenkappperry.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 12 Aug 2002 11:59:55 -0400 Bill Willson wrote [quoting Millet & Jackson, who were quoting Kimball & McConkie, who were not, in fact, quoting the text of the revelation, but have consistently and deliberately avoided doing so]: > Elder McConkie further described the occasion: > > From the > midst of eternity, the voice of God, conveyed by the power of the Spirit, > spoke to his prophet. . . . And we all heard the same voice, received the > same message, and became personal witnesses that the word received was the > mind and will and voice of the Lord. This statement implies a textual message. Words were spoken and heard. The text of these words continues to be withheld. We're all free to believe that these words were not recorded, but to me, that seems unlikely. Unless there was an accompanying commandment not to write or directly quote the revelation, I can see no good reason why the text of the revelation continues to be some big mystery. I can, however, imagine several bad reasons. Maybe I put too much stock in actual words, but I do. I read the scriptures and ponder the words. I puzzle over the word choice in the law of tithing that says to give 10% of your (income, no. increase, no.) interest. Hmmm, interest, very interesting. I ponder that the D & C tells us Emma Smith was "ordained" by the laying on of hands by Joseph to put together a music book. Not "set apart" not "commissioned" but "ordained." Hmmmm. Interesting. To me, text is important. This list is all about Mormon Letters. Words. Specific word choices. At this point I would like to conclude (borrowing from Paris Anderson's post on ellipted letters, or was it unsavory etymologies? Same thing.) in a series of inarticulate grunts, moans and sighs. If you all are in tune, you will just automatically know what I'm trying to communicate. Grunt. Moan. Sigh. Tony Markham -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] Kurt HALE, _The Singles Ward_ (Review) Date: 10 Aug 2002 16:03:10 -0600 THE SINGLES WARD 2002 Halestorm Entertainment Directed by Kurt Hale "Please, Don't Try This at Home" It seemed like everyone and their dog had seen _Singles Ward_ before me, and they'd all expressed an opinion. (The dog's: "Ruff ruff!") I tried hard to enter the theater with a clean slate in my mind, but all I could think of was how my artistic colleagues disliked it, and I probably would too. To my dismay, as the film rolled, I began to wonder if I would have to go on record as actually liking the film, risking the derision of my peers. The opening sequence was cute and clever, with the credits being presented through scrapbooking. Already we are made aware that LDS culture is going to be tweaked. The main character, Jonathan, began a dialog with the viewer, a la Ferris Buehler, which, although not especially original, still works for a spoof film. Then the jokes started flying. Dry, quick, deliciously insider jokes. Blink and you might miss a few. It reminded one of Mel Brooks or _Mystery Science Theater 3000_ style humor. The minutes ticked by, and still I found the film pleasantly enjoyable. Alas, my reputation would be ruined when I reported that I actually liked _Singles Ward_! But time took its ugly toll and saved my reputation. The cleverness of the first several scenes turned out to be nothing more than beginner's luck. The filmmakers threw a bunch of mud on the wall, and some of it stuck. The rest of the film was just wet dirt lying on the ground. There were moments of semi-genius with the satire. And there were moments when I thought a real-life singles ward FHE group had grabbed a video camera and started goofing off. _Singles Ward_ suffered horribly from the small budget. But the smallness of the budget isn't what caused the suffering. Plenty of independent filmmakers have done a lot with a little cash. _Singles Ward_ filmmakers just made the film, and if the money wasn't there, they let it show on the screen. One moment you could feel like you were watching a regular movie. The next moment, the scene wasn't even in focus. There couldn't possibly have been an actual cinematographer employed on the set. Just someone's Uncle Rufus who said, "Hey, I can run a camera," and the producers believed him. The story starts out well enough, with Jonathan being dumped by his apostatizing wife, who only joined the church in the first place so she could marry him. The experience leaves him cold to the gospel and inactive from church. We get all the sarcastic jabs that you would expect from a cynical Jackmormon, and many of them are quite witty. He regains interest in the church when, in the singles ward he's assigned to, he runs across a woman he's attracted to. We never actually find out what about her is so attractive to him--she's cute enough, but not ravishing, and borders on Molly Mormonism. One was left wondering what about her could motivate a confirmed cynic out of his cynicism. The plot required that he be attracted to her, and that was that. Eventually the story loses its way. It meanders to an eventual climax, but feels sloppy getting there. It's good for people to smell the flowers along the way, but a movie plot has no such luxury. _Singles Ward_ had a number of cameos by local celebrities, but for the most part, they were wasted. The celebrity seemed uncomfortable and stilted, or the joke just wasn't funny, or in the case of ex-BYU football coach Lavell Edwards, couldn't keep from grinning as he delivered his lines. (Could the producers only afford one take per cameo celebrity?) Only computer ad lunatic Superdell seemed at home making a fool of himself as a supergeek. In addition to a constant focus problem, the film had the familiar small-budget problem of having poor sound, to the point where I couldn't understand some dialog. As any low budget independent filmmaker worth his salt will tell you, you can get away with some poor quality images, but if the sound is bad, the whole film will seem shoddy. _Singles Ward_ filmmakers obviously never learned that lesson. In spite of all the reasons to criticize the film, viewing it in a sold-out theater was an eye-opener. The audience was chuckling and laughing throughout, thoroughly enjoying themselves. There can be no doubt the audience was almost 100% LDS, because the film is so insider-oriented that no non-LDS person could get much out of it. Yet this is a film that pokes fun at everything LDS--right down to the schmaltzy tear-jerk climax that gets a delicious mocking--and has a main character that's inactive and about as cynical towards the gospel as you can get without becoming meanspirited. There was even smoking and beer-drinking shown on-screen, by a member no less (albeit an apostatizing member). The score included primary songs about deity that were performed in very unorthodox musical styles (which may very well be the most delightful part of the film). Yet an LDS audience enjoyed it. Maybe Mormons have more of a sense of humor about themselves than some think. But that doesn't excuse the fact that the filmmakers didn't know what they were doing. Filmmakers are professionals with serious skills they've developed to ply their trade in as effective a manner as possible. Please, children, do not try this at home. The last thing LDS art needs is another sloppy piece of artwork that becomes popular. _Singles Ward_ was a film that should have been made, but it should have been made by people who know how to make a movie. -- 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early Date: 12 Aug 2002 10:39:17 -0600 Following is a Deseret News report on the panel Levi Peterson pulled together mainly through AML-List. Sunstone looks at missions gone awry Outside help is urged to counter the stigma By Carrie A. Moore Deseret News religion editor LDS missionaries who return home before their two-year assignment is complete face unique challenges that affect not only themselves, but their families as well. Sharing their stories at the annual Sunstone Symposium on Thursday, a panel of people affected in various ways by such a scenario discussed the intricacies that confront Latter-day Saints when a mission goes awry, whether because of illness, mental health concerns or lost faith. Louis Moench, a psychiatrist at the Salt Lake Clinic who treats such missionaries and their families, said The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has come "a long way" toward recognizing the emotional needs missionaries have. Early leaders tended to view mental health professionals with suspicion, he said, preferring to place their trust in God over the precepts of men. But in recent years, "the church missionary committee has recognized the need for science as well as faith to keep missionaries functioning." Just within the past 18 months, he said, several new services have become available to missionaries and their families for those who need mental health counseling or who return home early. Just within the past two months, he said, materials have been distributed to local leaders that emphasize the need to welcome and assist missionaries who return home early, whatever the reason. Statistics show that while 90 percent of those who return early because of physical illness will return to complete their mission, only 20 percent of those who return with mental health concerns will go back to the mission field, "and a substantial number of those will return home again" before their assignment ends. The pressure on missionaries is great in the best of circumstances, he said, but those with unresolved or latent mental health concerns are often "broadsided" by their illness when the traditional support system is left behind. Many experience intense feelings of guilt "thinking they just have to work harder" and everything will get better, he said. Three things he said that help such missionaries and their families understand are that "complete self-reliance is a myth, that we are saved by grace after all we can do, and that their offering is acceptable to the Lord." Kathy Tyner, whose son returned home early for medical reasons, said a mission equals a "right of passage" in LDS culture, and that the planning and celebrating surrounding a mission call and farewell is topped only by a temple marriage and wedding reception. Because the prescribed routine for receiving a call, entering the mission field and serving the full term is so inculcated within cultural expectations, anyone who falls short of the ideal will suffer, she said. Rather than leaving reaction to her son's early return in the hands local church leaders, Tyner said she and her husband explained the situation to their ward members during a testimony meeting. The resulting support he felt helped him immensely, she said. Gae Lyn Henderson, an English instructor at Salt Lake Community College and mother of six sons, said she watched in agony as one of her sons received a mission call, had his farewell and ended up staying at home. "People began asking why he was still around." After months of worry and conversation with other ward members concerned about her son, she tried to imagine "the stress that his mother and his friends' mothers anxiety put on him. He didn't go on a mission despite the prayer and positive thinking." Life was hard for him, she said, and "nothing seemed to work or fit for him." After years of living at home and trying to find himself, he finally moved out and got on with his life. Despite the challenges he faced by not serving a mission, "I believe God loves my son and loves me," she said. The experience provided many difficult lessons, and "I have no more expectations for his life. It belongs only to him." Christopher Bigelow, editor of Irreantum, the journal of the Association for Mormon Letters, shared his own mission experience of "checking out" during the last year of his service in Australia. "I honestly felt I was cut out only to serve about 12 months." When the mission president realized he wasn't motivated, "he put all of us unmotivated people together, and it was a big waste of time and money." He suggested a six month "trial period" may help many who find themselves in a situation they couldn't comprehend and lessen the stigma for those who find the experience doesn't suit them. Thom Duncan, who has written a play about a missionary who returns home early, said many church members who've seen "Matters of the Heart" at the Center Street Theater in Orem have found it to be "therapeutic." One missionary who came home early told Duncan after seeing that he felt it was the first time "anyone really understood him." He said missionaries would be better served to understand the realities and challenges of missionary service before they make the decision to go. "I think knowing up front makes it more effective and not as disappointing" when things don't go as planned. The symposium, held at the Sheraton Hotel downtown, features dozens of presentations on a variety of LDS-related topics. It continues through Saturday. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] Jerry Johnston on Chaim Potok Date: 12 Aug 2002 10:53:55 -0600 Novelist, rabbi led by spirit By Jerry Johnston Deseret News columnist When I heard that Chaim Potok - the novelist and rabbi - had passed away, my first thought was of the evening he visited Salt Lake City and spoke to an overflow crowd at Kingsbury Hall. Most of the audience were members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I also thought of a scene from the movie "God's Army," the Mormon missionary film. There, winsome Sister Fronk declares that one of her favorite books is "My Name Is Asher Lev," Potok's novel about a Jewish boy branching out into the world while trying to hold fast to his roots. For decades now, a kinship has been kindled between Potok and the LDS faithful. His novel "The Chosen" became a movie that is almost always checked out at local video stores. His book "Davita's Harp" was a Utah bestseller. Potok had a way of sounding the same themes and feelings that LDS people hold near and dear. For example, when national-caliber journalists write about Brigham Young University, they often capture the social and economic aspects of the school but gloss over the spiritual motivation of the people. Potok never glossed over spiritual motivation. In his novels and stories, characters are driven by their spirituality. Potok also felt the friction that exists when the "world" begins to seep into the lives of religious communities. The conflicts in his stories occur when young people - raised as traditional Jews - become seduced by the wonders of the world around them. How much of that world should religious souls embrace, his novels ask. How much should they shun? And where is the line between God and mammon? These are questions that religious souls - be they LDS, Amish or Muslim - ask themselves late at night. They are also questions that keep parents awake fretting about their kids. I was confronting those same questions in college when my friend, Randall Hall, slipped me a copy of Potok's novel "My Name Is Asher Lev." I could have sworn Chaim Potok had been reading my private journal. Asher Lev is a young Jewish artist. He has been raised to be an Orthodox Jew, but the colors and themes he sees in the artwork of the world is more than he can resist. He pants after the daring and beauty he sees in those paintings the way a deer pants after the streams. He hides his more "worldly" work from his family, of course, until one of his paintings bursts on the art scene and creates a scandal. It is a painting of his mother standing at the window of their home. The frame of the window - in the shape of a Christian cross - bisects her image. Asher calls that painting "Brooklyn Crucifixion." And when critics discover it, Asher becomes famous. He also becomes torn between his inner demons and angels. He, himself, becomes crucified between two cultures. In the end, Asher Lev has become the poster boy for the kind of choices that spiritual souls must learn to make. They are choices that range from the small (How many earrings are too many? How much midriff is too much?) to the monumental (How literally should we take the Biblical account of the creation?). They are the kind of choices Chaim Potok could write about with insight and integrity because he had been forced to make them himself. Now he is gone, the wonder and wisdom in his books are proof enough that Rabbi Potok chose very well. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 12 Aug 2002 10:59:40 -0600 To Tony Markham's idea that there must have been some text, some writ= ten word given to those in the temple on June 1, 1978 (the day the revelation was ac= tually received--it was made public a week later), some words by President K= imball prior to the revelation might be enlightening: "Many people expect that if there be revelation it will come with awe= -inspiring, earth-shaking display. For many it is hard to accept as revelations = those numerous ones on Moses=92 time, in Joseph=92s time, and in our own year=96thos= e revelations which come to prophets as deep, unassailable impressions. The sound of the= voice of the Lord is a continuous melody and a thunderous appeal.=94 When John tells us that "in the beginning was the Word and the Word w= as with God and the Word was God," he's obviously not referring to a text but to a ma= nifestation (even a corporeal manifestation) of power. (I've always found it int= eresting that the Spanish translation for "Word" in that scripture is not "palabra"= but "el verbo"--the VERB, inplying something active.) One of the principles = of good writing is to leave enough blank spaces for the reader to fill in. If you ha= ve a character feeling through folliage knowing that there's a poisonous snake somew= here in the leaves, you don't need to say, "He was feeling apprehensive." The re= ader knows, and telling him something so plain is not only an insult to his intellige= nce, it's just bad writing. Likewise, God does not spell everything out for us. We= learn principles and then fill in the blanks with our own lives. We're aske= d during temple recommend interviews if we consider ourselves worthy to enter the tem= ple. Since the temple is the symbolic presence of the Lord, it's a little silly to s= ay, "You betcha. Right now." As I answered the questions yesterday, I said t= hat the more I grow, the more I realize how far I am from where I need to be; how fa= r my heart is =66rom being consecrated; how far my actions are from being Christlik= e at the core. Only through the grace of Jesus Christ can I answer that particular q= uestion in the affirmative, but God continues to reveal principles to me, new things= I need to learn, new ways I need to love, new challenges to my tendency to hold= a grudge instead of forgive. I have never literally heard the voice of God te= lling me specifics, but I have been absolutely led to understand what God's wi= ll was. This post is getting long, but I'll tell one incident I shared with Darius= Gray (thus tying it in with Mormon letters). You all probably think that we're = the best of friends and never have any disagreements. Wrong. We are both hard-h= eaded, stubborn cusses and are capable of fighting in really stupid ways. Our peacem= aker is my husband, who, fortunately, has a testimony that Darius and I have a m= ission we are to accomplish. About a year ago, Darius and I were disagreeing about= something in the book--I don't remember what it was. I told Bruce that I didn't t= hink I could work with Darius anymore and had a long list of why not's. The man w= as just too difficult. Bruce called Darius and had a long chat with him and, of = course, got Darius's side of the story--somewhat different than my own. Then my = sweet husband told me, "I have a testimony of many things. One is that you two are= to do this assignment. Margaret, you need to figure out a way to get past this = and do what the Lord has asked you to do." I thought about it, prayed to feel some m= ercy in my hard heart, and then felt strongly that I needed to drive the 45 miles up = to Darius's house and talk to him in person. Bruce agreed to supervise the kids = while I did this. But Darius wasn't home when I got there. I didn't hear a voic= e, but I felt a distinct impression that he was at Green Flake's grave. (If you don'= t know who Green Flake is, please go buy several copies of our books.) Now, you= need to understand that I get lost just about everytime I try to find a locat= ion--even if I have a map. I am "directionally challenged." Somehow though, I didn= 't get lost that day, though I had only been to Green's grave on one other occasi= on. I drove directly to the cemetery, and there was Darius. As I walked up to hi= m, he said, "Well, I know we're supposed to work together. I asked the Lord that= if that was the case, to have you come here. I didn't think there was a chance i= n hell that would happen." No text was ever given to any of us. In fact, two of= the three of us (Bruce gets to be the righteous one) were resisting righteous prin= ciples. Direction was given anyway, in a still, small voice and quiet impress= ions. I learn that if I can keep my own shouting selfishness at bay, I hear the imp= ressions much better. I have a testimony that Spencer Kimball, though he had to "w= restle" with his own perceptions and all he had been taught about the issue, recei= ved clear direction--not in words (which are restrictive by their nature) but i= n the silent opening of further light and knowledge. After the revelation in the = temple on June 1, 1978, NO ONE SPOKE. All the apostles went to their lockers in sil= ence. Often the most sacred experiences are too precious to try to encapsulate in= words, and doing so would somehow be blasphemous. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 12 Aug 2002 11:05:00 -0600 Tony Markham wrote: > > Elder McConkie further described the occasion: > > > > From the > > midst of eternity, the voice of God, conveyed by the power of the Spirit, > > spoke to his prophet. . . . And we all heard the same voice, received the > > same message, and became personal witnesses that the word received was the > > mind and will and voice of the Lord. > > This statement implies a textual message. Words were spoken and heard. The > text of these words continues to be withheld. We're all free to believe that > these words were not recorded, but to me, that seems unlikely. Unless there was > an accompanying commandment not to write or directly quote the revelation, I can > see no good reason why the text of the revelation continues to be some big > mystery. I can, however, imagine several bad reasons. President Hinckley spoke directly to the question when he said (quoted from "Priesthood Restoration" as it appeared in the Ensign, October 1988): The Spirit of God was there. And by the power of the Holy Ghost there came to that prophet an assurance that the thing for which he prayed was right, that the time had come, and that now the wondrous blessings of the priesthood should be extended to worthy men everywhere regardless of lineage. Every man in that circle, by the power of the Holy Ghost, knew the same thing. It was a quiet and sublime occasion. There was not the sound "as of a rushing mighty wind," there were not "cloven tongues like as of fire" (Acts 2:2-3) as there had been on the Day of Pentecost. But there was a Pentacostal spirit, for the Holy Ghost was there. No voice audible to our physical ears was heard. But the voice of the Spirit whispered with certainty into our minds and our very souls. It was for us, at least for me personally, as I imagine it was with Enos, who said concerning his remarkable experience, "And while I was thus struggling in the spirit, behold, the voice of the Lord came into my mind." (Enos 1:10.) President Hinckley seems adamant that there were no words to the revelation, only a confirmation of what they had discussed earlier and the change in policy they had agreed to among themselves. While I don't recall the source, it seems to me that Elder McConkie was corrected for suggesting a textual revelation in some of his writings when no such text was received (I'll look for the reference and post it if I can find it). I would also like to know why so few of the details have been made known, because I would very much like to know exactly what happened and how. I believe those details would be a blessing and a testimony to the Church. Perhaps one of the reasons so little detail has been offered is precisely the lack of explicit words and the possibility that people could question the validity of the revelation because of that lack. I don't know. In the end I'm not really sure it matters exactly what the details are as much as that we accept the words of the prophets that it was revelation from the Lord. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Polemical Style Date: 12 Aug 2002 11:27:08 -0600 Jacob Profitt wisely pointed out that my condemnation of Marianne Jennings = was as guilty of polemical excess as I think her column is. Please = understand that I was just so thrilled to finally get to go off on her, I = overdid it a bit; guilty as charged. =20 A few minor points: >The lesson there is that, even if you >disagree with her you don't partake of the same faults of exaggeration >and misrepresentation. Quite so, point well taken, I'll repent. >She's in earnest, as >much as others think that's funny. At least, as much as I can gauge her >motivation. Some of her defenders have said that she's being funny, she's a satirist, = and so whassamatter wichoo, don't you got no sense of humah? And = sometimes I read something that seems a bit like it needs a rimshot; a = sentence construction that sounds sort of like a attempted joke. Of = course, she's never actually funny, but it seems possible she's trying to = be. =20 > >it's one thing to have two people study certain public policy > >issues and come to different opinions about them. It's quite >> another to turn absolutely every dispute and disagreement ad >> hominem. There's such an 'us vs. them' streak in Marianne, >> and I see that in a certain kind of Mormonism. Such a >> tremendous tendency to judge and condemn, which we see >> sometimes, unfortunately, in Mormonism. Jacob replied: >See, in my opinion, I think more Mormon conservatives are like me than >like you describe here. I think that those who judge and condemn are a >small minority (though a vocal one). =20 Of course. I don't dispute this. The small minority is awfully vocal, = but their numbers are small enough, I'm sure. >Now, you (Eric) are in a situation >where you are vulnerable to those willing to judge and condemn and you >have to be hyper-aware of them. I can understand being sensitive and >wishing they'd disappear altogether. =20 Sensitively and intelligently put. >That's a worthwhile goal and >probably achievable, though hard. Still, I *do* believe it is a small >minority and that Mormons are, on whole, more accepting of others and >kind than the surrounding general population.=20 And I think perhaps the Olympics showed that this is true. >Personally, if >she's carried in the Deseret News, I'd rather that they replace her with >Linda Chavez, Michelle Malkin, or Kathleen Parker (assuming they don't >carry them now). Depends. For partisan reasons, I see a certain advantage in having the = right represented by a kook. But of course, for public policy reasons, = it's best if intelligent commentary from a variety of perspectives were = the norm. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: [AML] Yet Another Request for Prayers Date: 12 Aug 2002 12:46:58 -0600 My co-author does not like to reveal anything about his health, so I will not get specific here. However, he is facing a really hard diagnosis. Please include him in your prayers. If you live near a temple, please put his name on the temple rolls: Darius Aidan Gray. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Russ Asplund Subject: RE: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 12 Aug 2002 13:03:09 -0600 This has been an interesting conversation, and I don't even know who to begin to respond to--but I wanted to share my personal feelings on this. I was a missionary in the south, not long after the revelation giving the priesthood to all worthy males. I was confronted with the past a lot, and spent much time thinking and praying about it. I was troubled because I found racism deeply wrong, and also because many of my fellow missionaries still believed the Cain/Less valiant school of thought. This is what I finally came up with. Perhaps it doesn't have to be that, "denying blacks the priesthood was either for their betterment or their detriment it either furthered the plan of salvation or hindered it." The principle goal of the restoration of the church at the time was to get the church restored and re-established on the earth. In order for that to work, it was necessary, for example, for the Saints to gather in one place--that they might have the strength and cultural identity to survive. Once the church grew beyond that point, that was no longer necessary and no one now is called to gather to Zion. I wonder if the issue of race and the priesthood might be somewhat the same. At the time the church was restored, the Civil was had yet to be fought. Race was a particularly divisive issue. I wonder if it simply wasn't the right time then to address the issue. If doing so would have made it more difficult, or in fact impossible, for the church to be established, as it would have given it's enemies one more hammer to pound it with. Perhaps that revelation had to wait for a time when people's hearts were in place, both within and without the church, that it could be implemented without endangering the greater mission of getting the church established. So it may have both hindered, by delaying the priesthood blessing, and helped by making the restoration of the gospel possible, and hence the blessings of the priesthood available throughout the earth. And then when people's hearts were ready, the revelation came. In the end, I'm mostly just grateful that the church can go everywhere now. But I wanted to raise the possibility that the answer could possible be more complex than simply the attitude of the early leaders of the church. Or maybe I'm just making excuses. Nonetheless, it helped me come to some peace with the church's past. Russell Asplund russa@candesa.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] Kerry Blair Interview? Date: 12 Aug 2002 13:17:45 -0600 Irreantum is overdue for a Covenant author interview (the only one we've done in the past is Rachel Nunes). I've read the reviews and comments on Kerry Blair with interest. Would she be Irreantum's best next interview prospect, or is there someone else publishing with Covenant who would be a better next choice? Chris Bigelow -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early - A Correction Date: 12 Aug 2002 14:22:11 -0600 Though I was quoted correctly, the article gave the impression that "Matters of the Heart" is currently playing at the Center Street Theatre. It is on this year's season but it is not currently playing. BTW, for those of you who are interested, we're running into a little problem opening on time. We will probably be a few weeks late when our first production will be "My Turn on Earth," a musical by Carol Lyn Pearson and Lex deAzevedo. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 12 Aug 2002 14:40:57 -0600 [MOD: An interesting question. We really don't want to get into questions of what constitutes revelation, but I think this issue in the way Thom has raised it is appropriate to AML-List. I would welcome more comments that engage this connection, which relates to issues of literary interpretation of scripture as well--without, if possible, getting too deep into issues of doctrinal interpretation...] > I don't know. In the end I'm not really sure it matters exactly what the > details are as much as that we accept the words of the prophets that it was > revelation from the Lord. At the risk of sounding more heretical than I usually do, I offer the following as a suggestion as to why there weren't published words to OD2. Since the explanation has to do with style and the word of the Lord, I feel it is appropriate for the list. Had OD2 been received in the nineteenth century, I believe it would have been written down. Further, I believe it would have been written in the first person, as if quoting the Lord himself. I don't believe the words would have been a direct quote but I believe it would have read that way. The Book of Mormon, and many sections of the D&C are written in this "Biblical" style. Such an explanation would tend to explain why we find phrases such Greek phrases as "Alpha and Omega" in a book written in Reformed Egyptian. It seems reasonable to me to believe that, even when apparently quoting the Lord, Joseph was actually writing from the impressions of his heart and adopting a Biblical like language because, the times and surrounding being what they were, it just seemed appropriate. I have read "revelations" received from Anna Lee, the Shaker Prophetess, and her writings also had a Biblical feel. Today, because of public education and other factors, writing in that style would appear archaic, out of step with the times. It would be like writing a novel but adopting the style of Edgar Rice Burroughs. People today want less floridness in the words they read and more succintness. "Just tell it like it is." So Spencer Kimball gets an impression of the spirit that it's time to make a stand on the race question and he chooses the style with which he feels most comfortable to convey that impression. Had Neal Maxwell been the prophet, I suspect there not only would have been a written revelation but it would have reflected Maxwell's poetic style. Just some thoughts about the interaction between revelation and literary style. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: RE: [AML] Polemical Style Date: 12 Aug 2002 17:05:21 -0700 (PDT) What interests me about Marianne Jennings is not her alleged political extremism (which I do not feel qualified to judge) but her polemical style. Most LDS writers have been brought up in a culture of "glorying in plainness", "let your yea be yea and your nay, nay" etc. etc. So we favor the so-called plain English style of George Orwell and Eugene England, of saying things as simply and elegantly as possible. Jennings is one of the few LDS writers I have observed to try the hyperbolic, exaggerated style of Mencken, P.J. O'Rourke, Hunter S. Tmompson, etc. We are all brought up to be so *nice*. In Jennings' work, the niceness gene is clearly absent. (Maybe because like Neil LaBute, she is a convert and hasn't had it imbued in her from childhood.) She's not very good, and not funny at all. But you have to admit it's not the norm (outside of, as I said before, the "F.A.R.M.S. Review of Books", that is, an internal press meant for like-minded Mormons.) ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathy Wilson Subject: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 12 Aug 2002 18:03:37 -0600 I just accepted a position teaching at our detention center. I was all prepared to refuse the offer but then visited the facility and had a look in the eyes of the students. . . .and it was a big Yes. The pay and hours are better than what I had at the college, oddly enough. And the curriculum is TOTALLY flexible. That means I must consider what types of book might be lifechanging for kids who will be in and out of my presence within about 45 days. Most of them are pretty good readers, but they have big gaps in their educational experiences because of family and their whole experience. Actually half of the kids have been in trouble and half of them are seriously at risk so taken into official custody. So . . .what would you have them read? Thank you so much. Cathy Wilson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "gtaggart" Subject: [AML] re: Institutional Repentance Date: 08 Aug 2002 21:41:34 -0700 Sometime ago, Margaret asked: =20 > Scott, HOW do you suggest we repent AS AN INSTITUTION? =20 And Cathy Wilson wrote, =20 "Perhaps this segues into Margaret's suggestion that the Priesthood wasn't given to the blacks till the general church membership could receive everyone with love--and sadly that seemed to take a very long time. So it all comes back to. . . .to me. There's no escaping the condition of my heart :), no matter how much I want to deflect any discomfort by discussing things. It's my responsibility to repent and become a Zion person. Times that by however many people are willing to do the same, and we're on the road to Zion." =20 And I responded, and Jonathan wrote back and suggested that I change a thing or two, to be specific, some sarcasm masquerading as irony. I forgot to re-post. So here it is, all cleaned up: =20 I just finished reading a Wendell Berry essay, "Why I'm Not Going to Buy a Computer." He writes, "To the conservation movement, it is only production that causes environmental degradation; the consumption that supports the production is rarely acknowledged to be at fault. The ideal of the run-of-the-mill conservationist is to impose restraints upon production without limiting consumption or burdening the conscience of consumers." =20 By analogy, this institutional repentance thing can be seen as an effort to lay the blame on anything, anyone, other than myself. Cathy's right. It would be time better spent if we spent it examining our own hearts. In so doing, consider what Elder McConkie said after the Revelation on the Priesthood, =20 There are statements in our literature by the early brethren which we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things=85 All I can say to that is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world. We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept. We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness, and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don't matter any more. It doesn't make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June of this year [1978]. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them. We now do what meridian Israel did when the Lord said the gospel should go to the gentiles. We forget all the statements that limited the gospel to the house of Israel, and we start going to the gentiles. (Cut and pasted from an article by Juliann Reynolds posted on FAIR's Website) =20 In short, we, as individuals should repent. We repent of prejudice (if we were prejudiced). We repent of conjuring up theories to cover the huge black holes in our understanding of Blacks and the priesthood. We repent of anything impure in our hearts relative to that doctrine. And, like McConkie, we humble ourselves, follow the living prophet, and become more tolerant of any and all. And--dare I say it--we do this whether we are white, brown, yellow, red, or black. =20 And if it helps our Black brothers and sisters, investigators and members alike, to give Elder McConkie=92s = talk in pamphlet form to the missionaries and offer a lesson or two or three on the subject in Gospel Doctrine, I=92m all for it. Still, I think the repentance time would be best spent working on our individual hearts. =20 Greg Taggart =20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Major Productions Subject: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 08 Aug 2002 21:30:07 -0500 Please pardon my query, but while a lot is made of Brother Brigham's emphasis on the importance of the theater to the early Saints, I have yet to hear what plays were performed in those very early days to divert the Saints after a hard day's labor of making the desert blossom as a rose. Any ideas? Any idea of resources that might contain a hint? Many thanks for any help! Robbin Major Missouri City, Texas -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: Re: [AML] Yet Another Request for Prayers Date: 12 Aug 2002 18:35:13 -0700 This is bad news. Please pass my personal greetings to him, and my prayers. *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 8/12/2002 at 12:46 PM margaret young wrote: >My co-author does not like to reveal anything about his health, so I >will not get specific here. However, he is facing a really hard >diagnosis. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "kumiko" Subject: [AML] Re: [AML-Mag] Kerry Blair Interview? Date: 12 Aug 2002 21:45:45 -0500 I think an interview with Heidi S. Swinton would be interesting. Her book _Sacred Stone_ is published by Covenant. But she's a non-fiction author, and documentary screenwriter. She also wrote "American Prophet: The Story of Joseph Smith" (1999) and "Trail of Hope: The Story of the Mormon Trail (1997). As for pure novelists, Thomas Eno has written very interesting novels, contemporary as well as speculative fiction. He would be interesting. Preston Hunter -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 12 Aug 2002 18:20:50 -0500 At 10:59 AM 8/12/02, you wrote: >Unless there was >an accompanying commandment not to write or directly quote the revelation, >I can >see no good reason why the text of the revelation continues to be some big >mystery. This is, in fact, quite possible. I don't know any more than anyone else on the subject, but I do know that on several occasions, certain scriptures were not allowed to be released to the general public until such and so a time. As in the story of the brother of Jared not being revealed until after the coming of Christ to America. I can't exclude the possibility. I'm following this discussion with much interest, but other than this I don't feel I have much intelligent to contribute. And this still isn't much. Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Levi Peterson" Subject: Re: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early Date: 12 Aug 2002 20:41:25 -0700 Thanks to Chris for forwarding the Deseret News article on our panel at Sunstone. It cheers me up to see that the Deseret News can cover a Sunstone event favorably. And thanks to Chris, Gae Lyn, Kathy, and Thom from the AML-List for their participation and also to our fifth member, Lou Moench. All presentations were articulate and intelligent. I could see that the audience listened intently. All seats were taken and some listeners were standing, about a hundred, I judge. Levi Peterson althlevip@msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lynette Jones Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Invoking Emotions Date: 12 Aug 2002 12:33:00 -0600 Thorn wrote: > > There is only one emotion that I believe is not morally or spiritually > > neutral--anger. > >Think about Christ rebuking the folks outside the temple? Joseph Smith >rebuking the guards at Liberty? Strong emotions both. Was the spirit not >present at those times. > >I think Mormons have a misconception that anger is not a Chirst-like >emotion. Anger toward sin and hypocrites -- you can't get more Christ-like >than that. The uncontrolled anger due to pride is the bad kind. So, do we really know that Chris was angry? Do we have to be angry to involve discipline or punishment, i.e. consequences? By the New Testament, from the references I found, anger was something to be quickly put away. I wonder if anger, like fear, has a very different definition in our current world than the way it was used in the Old Testament. Perhaps the New Testament was where this change began. Or perhaps the words anger and angry should be looked upon with some skepticism in the Old Testament as the indulgence of frustrated priests trying to scare the Israelites into obedience. Lynette >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] Recording Revelation (was Institutional Repentance) Date: 12 Aug 2002 23:07:36 -0500 Scott Parkin: I would also like to know why so few of the details have been made known, because I would very much like to know exactly what happened and how. I believe those details would be a blessing and a testimony to the Church. _______________ I believe the Brethren have shared as much as they are able or allowed to share. When I consider how interesting it would have been to be in the room at that time, I quickly reconsider that I may either have withered or kept the Spirit from that occasion, in which latter case there would not have been a revelation. I have read or heard accounts of that day from four men who were there. (Two are no longer living.) Each was told in a public setting. Each time the speaker was careful what he said. For me the Spirit was there as they spoke, and I was even more certain after each account that it was a revelation from the Lord to His servants, of which I had first learned on June 11th and had had confirmed to me that same day as I announced it to the members I served at that time on the other side of the world. In my own personal experience with revelation, either personal or on behalf of others when I have been so authorized, sometimes I think of the words and the Spirit confirms them. Other times the Spirit puts the words into my mind and I know their source. Sometimes I see a picture in my mind, and as I begin to describe it, the Spirit confirms that the description is correct. Sometimes I have not been able to describe what I have seen, and sometimes I have known better than to describe it. I have seen pictures of the room in the Salt Lake Temple in which the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles meet. I have listened as two apostles have described that room. These pictures and descriptions have been detailed enough that I am able to picture in my mind what the room would look like during one of their meetings. These two descriptions, coupled with the four descriptions of that day in June 1978, have served to etch a vision in my own mind of what transpired that day in such a way that I feel I might well have been there, even though I wasn't. Only the Spirit can do that for spiritual settings. Every writer wishes he or she could do that for temporal settings. And the best ones do. Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: luannstaheli Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 13 Aug 2002 07:55:48 -0600 Cathy, If you'll send me your snail mail, I'll send you the draft of my book on literature to use with adolescents. I think you'll find lots of good titles and activities to use with them. I only ask one favor, that you let me know what works and what doesn't. I've submitted the text to a publisher and I'm trying to collect data from teachers other than myself and my own classes regarding the book. Lu Ann Staheli -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: [AML] Great Salt Lake Book Festival Date: 12 Aug 2002 18:20:19 -0600 The Utah Humanities Council's Great Salt Lake Book Festival is a free event bringing together authors of every genre to speak to the public about their work. Children's authors, poets, novelists, essayists, writers of nonfiction and of mysteries, as well as experts in publishing and the writing process will be available over the three days. Featured authors coming in 2002 include Andrei Codrescu, Katie Lee, Greg Child, Mark Spragg, and Rick Ridgeway. Author of special interest to the List: Margaret Young, Darius Gray, Emma Lou Thayne, Louise Plummer, Tom Plummer, Michael Tunnel, Dean Hughes, Kimberly Heuston, and Pat Bagley (and probably others I'm not familiar with). For Children New this year: Salt Lake Community College joins UHC in offering children's authors at two of their campuses on Friday, September 13. Call Jill Keller, 801-957-3115 for a full listing. At the Westminster Campus site on Saturday and Sunday, September 14-15, you will also hear nationally celebrated children's authors. Children's authors invited this year include Allen Say, Laura Numeroff, Carol Lynch Williams, Michael Tunnell, Dean Hughes, and Bruce Hucko. Children (ages 4 and up) may create their own books in bookmaking workshops, make sheets of paper from pulp with an experienced papermaker, operate a letterpress, and watch a demonstration of the ancient art of bookbinding. There will also be storytelling sessions and a Poetry Slam for teens. Exhibitors The Great Salt Lake Book Festival features scores of exhibitors--experienced book sellers of new, used, and rare books, literary organizations, publishers, and independent authors. If you are interested in participating in the Festival as an exhibitor, please call Jean Cheney at 801-359-9670, or write cheney@utahhumanities.org. The Great Salt Lake Book Festival has received major funding from the R. Harold Burton Foundation. Dates and Locations September 13: Salt Lake Community College (Children's Authors) South City Campus (9 am - Noon) 1575 S. State St. (Park in rear) and Jordan Campus (2 pm - 5 pm) 3491 W. Wights Fort Rd., 9000 South (Southeast corner of Bangerter Hwy and 9000 South) September 14-15: Westminster College (Adult and Children's Authors) 1840 South 1300 East, Salt Lake City For more information and a schedule, visit http://www.utahhumanities.org/bookfestival/bookfestival2002.php Marny Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Barbara R. Hume" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 13 Aug 2002 08:38:02 -0600 My teenage grandson has been in some trouble with detention. He has found himself drawn into Orson Scott Card's Ender books and S. A. Salvatore's Dark Elf books. Many of these young people who are intelligent but prone to making poor life choices seem to find fantasy novels a form of both escape and learning. barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 13 Aug 2002 10:07:26 -0600 To Cathy's question about curriculum--I think it's a really good idea to ask the list what subjects are truly essential, and what subjects are particularly helpful to students with special needs. I can certainly recommend a good language course, but I'm not sure it's essential to learn a second language. Some students would benefit far more by performing Shakespeare than learning a Spanish dialogue. The question is much on my mind because Bruce and I have just taken in a foster son who has had a lousy upbringing. We know there will be huge gaps in his education, and we've already started observing where we need to fill in. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 13 Aug 2002 11:25:41 -0500 At 07:03 PM 8/12/02, you wrote: >I just accepted a position teaching at our detention center. > Actually half of the kids have been in trouble and half of them are >seriously at risk so taken into official custody. > >So . . .what would you have them read? Four books come immediately to mind. The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton The Only Alien on the Planet by Kristen Randle The Lottery Rose by Irene Hunt ...this one may have too "young" of a protagonist, but some of these kids could probably relate to his life pretty well (unfortunately). To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee And at great risk of being presumptuous, I'd like to offer my book, Prodigal Journey. Discard that recommendation freely if you like, but several people have told me it helped them. :-) All these books have themes of finding the good in flawed people and offer some hope. I would avoid Steinbeck, personally, because he has such a lack of hope for the world. It would be good to offer them stories of personal redemption, finding peace and hope through adversity, and real consequences of choice, good and bad. Linda Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 13 Aug 2002 12:37:54 -0600 On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 18:03:37 -0600 Cathy Wilson writes: > So . . .what would you have them read? The Human Comedy by William Saroyan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: daryoung@juno.com Subject: [AML] AML Dinner Out Date: 13 Aug 2002 19:27:27 GMT It's decided. We will meet at Chevy's at 6:30 p.m., Thursday, August 22. The address is 539 W University Parkway (1300 S), Orem. Our reservation is for 12-15 people. (I hope for more, though. I hope that some of you have just forgotten to respond but will still be there. I don't anticipate a problem if we have more people.) The reservation is under "Chris Bigelow." See you there! Darlene Young p.s. Thanks to Chris for the arrangements. ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lwilkins@fas.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early - A Correction Date: 13 Aug 2002 16:45:40 -0400 So... when do you expect the opening production to start? I've been looking forward to attending for several months now. If it runs before Sept. 3 (which is when I leave town), I'll be there. --Laraine Wilkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 13 Aug 2002 13:33:38 -0600 ___ Thom ___ | Had OD2 been received in the nineteenth century, I believe it | would have been written down. ___ Just to make a counter argument, most of the important revelations of the 19th century weren't written down. Indeed many of the significant sections of the D&C with respect to doctrine are taken from notes of Joseph's sermons which are very fragmentary in nature. Most of what we take to be so unique about Mormons are primarily what we call the Navuoo doctrines. But the Nauvoo doctrines are themselves doctrines that appear to have evolved somewhat and which never appear in anything like a primary revelation. Rather it seems that Joseph studied a lot out in his mind and then got confirmation. The production of texts about these doctrines then arises in a manner much more in keeping with what we see in OD-1 or OD-2. There are exceptions to this. Yet I'd note that the one primary exception is D&C 138 which is Joseph F. Smith's revelation -- an event in the 20th century. Even the revelations that appear more "textual" often are themselves the product of revision. This includes the book of Moses which was part of the JST. If you look at how the JST was compiled it wasn't a dictation of the sort the BoM was. Rather it was a constant reworking by a process of study, prayer, production which was then repeated in a cycle. This idea of a pure textual revelation that has developed in the church simply has little historical basis. Yes that appears to have happened with the Book of Mormon. But that appears to have been the exception not the rule. Further if we think of our own personal revelations I think we have the example of the way revelation usually works. There are cases of textual revelation (such as giving priesthood blessings or even being given what to pray for). However even in those cases the production of the text is more a joint composition between the individual and God. It isn't God dictating. (At least it never has been for me) Most often what happens is that we study something out and get guidance in our study and the a kind of confirmation of the final product. I just don't get the impression that God views texts with quite the same sense we do. This so-called neo-literalism seems quite difficult to reconcile to the manner of revelation. That's true even in the case of the Book of Mormon. Stylistically the Book of Mormon seems quite content to quote the KJV or the KJV with variations when appropriate, go off into a kind of literalistic Hebrew translation at other times, and then more a flowing paraphrase and other times yet. Blake Ostler even suggests that passages in the Book of Mormon might be inspired commentary on the underlying text rather than a translation per se. (i.e. the sort of thing a modern translator might put in a footnote or introductory commentary rather than interspersed with the translation - although that is purely a convention of modern style) I think that the neo-literalist approach to texts in Mormonism does have good points. Yet this conflating of revelation and textuality seems quite odd to me. It is, I think, an influence of Protestantism. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early Date: 13 Aug 2002 18:09:05 -0600 I think our panel was the only Sunstone event the Deseret News covered at all. Is that correct? I believe the reason they were able to do so is that Dr. Moench made some statements that put the Church in a favorable, progressive light, which the reporter led her story with. Meanwhile, we got much fuller-bodied Sunstone coverage over at the "new" Tribune, with all the controversial stuff on leaving the Church, dealing with ecclesiastical abuse, and continuing to figure out what Brigham Young's role was in the MMM. It's fascinating to watch how the two newspapers cover things. It's nice we have both papers, but I'd definitely take the Trib over the Des News. Chris Bigelow -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Box Office Report Aug. 9 Date: 13 Aug 2002 18:47:35 -0500 Feature Films by LDS/Mormon Filmmakers and Actors Weekend Box Office Report (U.S. Domestic Box Office Gross) Weekend of August 9, 2002 Report compiled by: LDSFilm.com [If table below doesn't line up properly,
try looking at them with a mono-spaced font, such as Courier - Ed.] Natl Film Title Weekend Gross Rank LDS/Mormon Filmmaker/Actor Total Gross Theaters Days --- ----------------------------- ----------- ----- ---- 6 Master of Disguise 5,107,640 2,568 10 Perry Andelin Blake (director) 23,762,214 15 Minority Report 733,531 678 52 Gerald Molen (producer) 128,157,396 32 The Divine Secrets of the 113,802 129 66 Ya-Ya Sisterhood 68,517,158 36 ESPN's Ultimate X 65,962 34 94 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 3,738,840 71 China: The Panda Adventure 13,768 6 381 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 2,734,220 73 The Singles Ward 12,621 8 192 Kurt Hale (writer/director) 921,019 John E. Moyer (writer) Dave Hunter (producer) Cody Hale (composer) Ryan Little (cinematographer) Actors: Will Swenson, Connie Young, Daryn Tufts, Kirby Heyborne, Michael Birkeland, Robert Swenson, Wally Joyner, Lincoln Hoppe, Gretchen Whalley, Sedra Santos, etc. 75 Ziggy Stardust & Spiders from Mars 11,231 1 33 Mick Ronson (2nd billed actor) 50,516 87 Galapagos 5,820 4 1018 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,589,284 107 The Believer 988 2 87 Ryan Gosling (lead actor) 256,810 SINGLES WARD PASSES BRIGHAM CITY: Kurt Hale's comedy "The Singles Ward" (HaleStorm Entertainment) reached a box office total of $921,019 over the weekend, passing the "Brigham City" box office total of $905,073. This makes "The Singles Ward" the 3rd highest grossing Latter-day Saint-themed feature film of the post-Dutcher era, after "The Other Side of Heaven" and "God's Army." THE RM ONLINE: The official website for the next HaleStorm Entertainment feature film "The R.M." is now online: http://www.rmthemovie.com/. Currently there's not a lot there, but it's worth checking out for the production stills currently posted, with a note that says a new still will be posted each day. Currently there is at least one still featuring Olympic gold medalist Rulon Gardner, who makes a cameo appearance in "The R.M." DUTCHER ON SMITH: Richard Dutcher took a break from working on "The Prophet" to discuss his research on the life of Joseph Smith, Jr., at the annual Sunstone Symposium. Articles about Dutcher's participation on a panel discussing the life of the prophet appeared in both the Ogden Standard Examiner and Salt Lake Tribune. Also presenting at Sunstone on an entirely different topic was Kevin Christensen, uncle of LDSFilm.com co-webmaster Thomas C. Baggaley. However, this presentation has no known connection to the Dutcher film (or any film for that matter) and at this time we are unaware of any articles in any local papers about Christensen's presentation, which nonetheless was very fascinating. DAY OF DEFENSE POSTPONED: The Latter-day Saint-themed feature film "Day of Defense", now in post-production, has moved its Kingsbury Hall, SLC premiere from September 21st 2002 to January 2003. UTAH FILM COMMISSION DOES LUNCH: Tomorrow, August 14th, the Utah Film Commission is sponsoring a Motion Picture Industry Luncheon for local film professionals. The featured speaker will be Robert Dowling, editor-in-chief and publisher of the Hollywood Reporter. Those film professionals interested in attending should contact the Utah Film Commission. JOHNNY LINGO REPORT: Jerry Molen isn't finished yet. We have received word that "The Legend of Johnny Lingo" - yes, that Johnny Lingo - will hit the theaters in spring of 2003. Partially sponsored by Morinda, Inc. makers of Tahitian Noni products, the film will be produced by Jerry Molen. We understand the film has actually been in production in the Cook Islands for the past five weeks and should finish shooting soon. The original Johnny Lingo film, directed by Wetzel O. Whitaker, was actually based on a short story, "Johnny Lingo's Eight Cow Wife" by author Patricia McGerr. It starred Makee K. Blaisdell, a BYU graduate who you may also remember from his guest appearance in the original Star Trek series and other television shows in the 60's and 70's. WRITING GRANT: We know nothing about this, and we really don't know the people involved, but they suggested we forward information about the Roy W. Dean Film and Video writing grant. Read all about it for yourself here: http://www.fromtheheartproductions.com/grantmain.html LET THE FLOOD BEGIN: Beginning this weekend, a number of films with Latter-day Saint filmmaker connections are scheduled to be released. The next three weekends feature the premieres of director Mark Swan's "The Princess and the Pea", "Serving Sara" (Latter-day Saint actress Alaina Kalanj in a minor role), the nationwide release of director Blair Treu's "Little Secrets", screenwriter/director Neil LaBute's "Possession" and the wider (than before) theatrical release of the Latter-day Saint-themed feature film "Out of Step" (produced by Cary Derbidge, directed by Ryan Little). We'll soon provide a pre-release report on Blair Treu's "Little Secrets." A little later, on September 20th... "Jack Weyland's Charly." A LONG PARAGRAPH: Every film faces the enormous challenge of finding enough funding. Those filmmakers that are able to attract investors have their films made. Those that do not, often are left out in the cold. We've been hearing rumblings lately of various efforts that are designed to take LDS cinema to the "next level". Encouraged by the financial successes of Richard Dutcher's films and "The Singles Ward", several local filmmakers are looking for ways to bring together the resources and expertise of LDS talent in a way that will allow for both a higher quality and quantity of independent LDS productions. The hope (which we imagine most LDS filmmakers share) is to be able to attract investors and produce films with the polish and production values equal to that of many Hollywood productions - but of course with better morals. Ideas which we have heard bounced around include combining the efforts of various production companies into one larger and stronger company, which would then have the resources to carry a film from pre-production through distribution much like the Hollywood studio system and finding various ways for the general public to invest in LDS films from investing in publicly-offered shares of stock in a production company to investing in a particular film and voting with their investment dollar which films ought to be made. Other ideas include a support network for LDS film professionals and a film school which would provide professional training and experience for young filmmakers in conjunction with one or two of the various local instutions of higher education. There is even word of a possible motion picture studio being built near Park City. As always we are interested in hearing your own ideas, opinions and responses on this topic. LDSfilm.com has no position on any of these ideas and is not an instigator of any such efforts -- it is simply a website. We're just passing along some notes about what has been discussed of late. BAGGALEY HYPES HIS OWN ALBUM (IN HIS DEFENSE, HUNTER *TOLD* BAGGALEY TO USE THIS SPACE TO HYPE THE ALBUM): Film composer and co-webmaster of LDSFilm.com Thomas C. Baggaley will be releasing a new CD for the LDS market in the first part of September. The album, titled "Spirit of the Sabbath", will include several new hymn arrangements as well as original music all centered around the theme of music you can feel good about listening to on the Sabbath. "As a film composer," Baggaley says, "I have learned to be particularly aware of the influence that music has on our feelings. When we talk about being careful about the music we listen to, so often we limit the discussion to the lyrics of the songs, but music's influence on us is not limited to the words we hear. I'm not talking about different genres of music either. Whether the music be popular music or classical music, it doesn't matter. Some songs can help us be more in tune with the Spirit, while others tend to drive the Spirit away. I tried to include music that would invite the Spirit, or in the case of the hymns, I tried to maintain the Spirit of each hymn in the arrangement." According to the press release from Baggaley's publishing company, Quest Haven Publishing, one strength of the CD will be its diversity of sounds and styles. The CD will include choral works, solo vocal and instrumental music and even a track from one of the films Baggaley has scored. Original track titles include "Not Going Alone", "Daughter of God", "My Gethsemane", "Fathers" and "Keep Looking for the Light". Among the hymns are arrangements of "Abide With Me; 'Tis Eventide", "Lead Kindly Light" and "I Know That My Redeemer Lives". Baggaley adds, "I think anyone who listens to the CD will find something that appeals to them, regardless of their age or particular musical tastes, as long as they are looking for something uplifting." The CD should be available in stores beginning September 9th. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 13 Aug 2002 18:09:45 -0700 (PDT) --- Major Productions wrote: > Please pardon my query, but while a lot is made of Brother Brigham's > emphasis on the importance of the theater to the early Saints, I have > yet to > hear what plays were performed in those very early days to divert the > Saints > after a hard day's labor of making the desert blossom as a rose. > > Any ideas? > > Any idea of resources that might contain a hint? > The Yale University historian Howard Lamar gave a lecture at Utah State University in 1998 titled "The Theater in Mormon Life and Culture." It was published by Utah State University Press. It gives some information about the Salt Lake Theater of Brigham's day. You can probably get it through interlibrary loan; there are several copies available at the Salt Lake City public library. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: RE: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 13 Aug 2002 20:11:41 -0600 Russell Asplund: I wonder if the issue of race and the priesthood might be somewhat the same. At the time the church was restored, the Civil was had yet to be fought. Race was a particularly divisive issue. I wonder if it simply wasn't the right time then to address the issue. If doing so would have made it more difficult, or in fact impossible, for the church to be established, as it would have given it's enemies one more hammer to pound it with. Perhaps that revelation had to wait for a time when people's hearts were in place, both within and without the church, that it could be implemented without endangering the greater mission of getting the church established. I tend to lean this direction, myself. Whenever I hear someone saying that the Church bowed to political pressure with the civil rights movement on the priesthood issue, I can't help but think, "and who do you think got the civil rights movement going in the first place?" I'm sure the Lord had his hand in it, and I think it was a way of preparing the world and members of the Church to accept the future change in policy. I know of at least one man who was great in many ways but raised very racist. He couldn't have handled the change--and I imagine many otherwise great church leaders and members would have fallen away had the ban been lifted decades earlier simply because of attitudes at the time. The gross weakness of racism had to be put up with in order for the Church to grow and get roots, IMO. Basically, members needed time to grow up on the issue, and the civil rights movement helped move along that growth. I'm so glad that there were so many faithful black members who stuck it out all those years on simple faith in a just God. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JLTyner Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 13 Aug 2002 19:13:56 -0700 Some of these are more middle readers, but depending on your students reading level and interests, some of these are still great books for many age groups. But I would also recommend you review these for yourself to make sure they'd be a good match with your students. Anything by William Shakespeare The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain A Tale Of Two Cities by Charles Dickens The Giver by Lois Lowry Where The Red Fern Grows by Wilson Rawls The Witch of Blackbird Pond by Elizabeth George Speare Lisa, Bright and Dark by John Neufeld That Was Then, This Is Now by S.E. Hinton The Boy Who Could Make Himself Disappear by Kin Platt My Life With Martin Luther King Jr. by Coretta Scott King The Writing On The Wall by Dean Hughes Dad Was A Carpenter by Kenny Kemp Three Against Hitler by Rudi Wobbe and Jerry Borrowman Sixteen In No Time by B.J. Rowley Circle Dance by Sharlee Mullins Glenn Say You Are My Sister by Laurel Brady Carolina Autumn by Carol Lynch Williams The Redwall Series by Brian Jacques Lord Of The Rings, The Hobbit, etc. by J.R.R. Tolkein The Harry Potter Books by J.K. Rowling The Prydain Chronicles by Lloyd Alexander Time Cat by Lloyd Alexander A Wrinkle In Time By Madeleine L'Engle The Forgotten Door by Alexander Key Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 13 Aug 2002 21:43:25 -0700 Robbin Major asked: > Please pardon my query, but while a lot is made of Brother Brigham's > emphasis on the importance of the theater to the early Saints, I have yet to > hear what plays were performed in those very early days to divert the Saints > after a hard day's labor of making the desert blossom as a rose. > > Any ideas? > > Any idea of resources that might contain a hint? My knowledge of the old Salt Lake Theatre is limited to the turn of the twentieth century when my great aunt, Emma Ramsey Morris, regularly performed there. She was a great singer, trained in Paris (at the National Academy of Music, I believe), and she gave concerts, performed in operatic productions, and even did song and dance-type numbers, I believe. Teddy Roosevelt called her "The Songbird of the West." My guess is that the kinds of things she did were similar to what had been done in that theatre since it was built. Richard Hopkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 13 Aug 2002 23:16:56 -0600 Two months before Joseph was killed, Brother Brigham took a part as the High Priest in a play called "Pizarro" but that was in Nauvoo. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early - A Correction Date: 13 Aug 2002 23:23:13 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 2:45 PM Correction > So... when do you expect the opening production to start? We hope it won't take more than an additional week from our expected opening (August 20), but we still don't know for sure. > I've been looking > forward to attending for several months now. If it runs before Sept. 3 (which > is when I leave town), I'll be there. Will you be coming back? Because we'll have a complete season running through August of next year. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 13 Aug 2002 23:35:36 -0700 The first thing that comes to mind is _I Am the Cheese_ by Robert Cormier, interesting thriller, and they might respond well to the sense of paranoia. Of course, there's always One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest by Ken Kesey if you want to talk about people abused by institutions. If it's in print A.E. Cannon's _The Shadow Brothers_ could be used as a textbook for how a writer creates symbols, or how they emerge if you let the setting let them emerge. Real good read too. Hal Borland's _When the Legends Die_, about a rodeo horse-killing American Indian cowboy worked well when we used it at North Seattle Community College in a class for people working towards their GEDs. If you want a different look at the destruction of AmerIndian culture try Brady Udall's _The Dreamlife of Edgar Mint_ or Michael Fillerup's _The Last Code Talker_ though the first might be too obscene for the boys' parents (haven't read my brand new $2 hardback from DI July 5 yet, so I'm not certain) and the last too stylistically difficult. They might also like Oliver Twist or Great Expectations Cat and Mouse by Gunter Grass is an interesting story about German teens at the start of WWII. Marilyn Brown's Ghosts of the Oquirrhs might be good, though POV is a girl. Shaxbeard could be intersting, esp. Llyr, McBeth and R&J, or Orange Julius Sneezer, or the Taming of Petruchio. All these plays have a lot to say to people who come from troubled backgrounds. Stephen King's _Pet Sematary_ is quite interesting, as is Peter Straub's _Floating Dragon_. There's a section in each novel that looks like the two were having a contest to see who could handle a certain premise best. Straub's Ghost Story (_What was the worst thing you've ever done? / I won't tell you that, but I'll tell you the worst thing that ever happened to me . . . the most dreadful thing . . . Young peole in the swearing time might respond well to the chapters on verbal subversion and fresh idiom from Paul Fussell's _Wartime_, available on theatlantic.com. Ender's Game or several other novels I haven't read by OSC. Black Boy by Richard Wright (have only read part of--some interesting comments on Mencken), or "The Man Who Was A'mos' a Man." Chester Himes' _The Real Cool Killers_ is a fascinating look at teenage gang life. Any of the Coffin Ed Johnson-Grave Digger Jones novels would probably work, though that's the only one I've read. A lot of Ray Carver's stories and poems, particularly "So Much Water So Close to Home," and some other stories in _Where I'm Calling From_. There's lots and lots of others. These all deal with young people in difficult circumstances, and might show the boys some part of themselves, some hope or some way out. Moby Dick might be a good piece (I keep remembering Robby Benson on a b-ball scholarship in One on One quoting Ahab). Isaac Bashevis Singer's "Gimpel the Fool" might work well--esp. the part where Gimpel plans to pee in the bread dough. Moving story. Best wishes to you. I'd better not reread this again or it will just get longer again. Harlow Clark ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 14 Aug 2002 08:08:18 -0700 on 8/12/02 5:03 PM, Cathy Wilson at cgileadi@emerytelcom.net wrote: > So . . .what would you have them read? > > Thank you so much. > > Cathy Wilson > I believe that they would be best served not by a life-changing book that has answers they need to hear but rather by reading anything at all. It would be best to choose books that are easy, fun, and captivating. Edgar Rice Burroughs and Louis Lamour wrote very short books that are often a lot of fun, and the language is not the sort of thing that's usually forced on kids like that miserable _To Kill a Mockingbird_. Sir Walter Scott's _Ivanhoe_ is another good one, or anything by Robert Louis Stevenson but particularly _Treasure Island_. This is a boy's list, of course. Though I love them myself you might have a hard time convincing boys to read Jane Austen or LM Montgomery, but it wouldn't be so hard to get girls to read them. I think they would do your boys every bit as much good, but Jane Austen has no action and Montgomery's books are all pastels and pretty paintings and so probably would be judged by the cover. I never stopped reading when I was a kid but I never liked any book that was assigned me in school. Besides the above mentioned "classic," I also had to read Woolf's idiotic _Three Guineas_, several of bad jokes by Hemingway, Steinbeck and Faulkner, _Billy Bud_, _The Scarlet Letter_, _Tess of the d'Urbervilles_, etc. I'd give anything to have that time back now. I've read most of them again since my school days, on the off chance that I was just too immature to understand them. With the exception of _Billy Bud_ I dislike most of them more now than I did then. Getting a kid to start wanting to explore is worth all the enforced learning in the world. One of my brothers never read much of anything in school, and "hated" reading because of what they forced him to read. When he got older he discovered that he loved reading, and his favorite book now is _The Brothers Karamazov_. If somebody had encouraged him to read anything he might've learned that much sooner. I tried, but I never had much patience and failed. Don't torture the poor kiddies, show them that the world is a much brighter and bigger place they'd ever imagine alone. Jim Wilson aka The Laird Jim -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 14 Aug 2002 11:14:48 -0600 A few resources: =20 My student, Nola Smith, wrote her doctoral dissertation on Nauvoo Theatre, = which is quite outstanding. Brigham Young even acted in one play in = Nauvoo, playing, as I recall, an Aztek priest in a popular melodrama of = the day, Pizarro. (When I get that time machine built, my first trip is = to Nauvoo to see that production.) There are a couple of books on the = Salt Lake Theatre, both flawed, but the BYU library Special Collections = has several better sources, including a listing of all plays done at the = SLT. =20 The Salt Lake Theatre repertoire was very conventional, including most of = the popular hits of the day. Brigham Young even called folks on missions = to go to New York and London, see everything, and buy plays for the Salt = Lake company. (If the Church were to revive that missionary calling, I'd = be reluctantly willing to serve in that capacity.) So what you saw were a = lot of melodramas, a few sentimental comedies, and probably a smattering = of variety acts. Brigham Young actively discouraged playwriting by the = Saints, and the Salt Lake Theatre did very few new plays by LDS playwrights= ; less than five, as I recall, none of them very successful or popular. = However, it's worth noting that Juanita Brooks includes in her book on the = Mountain Meadows Massacre a most intriguing footnote, suggesting that a = play was performed in St. George just before the attack. The title of = that play is suggestive: Haun's Mill. I haven't been able to find = anything more about it, nor has a copy of the playscript surfaced, and = I've been looking for ten years. If anyone has info, I'd be grateful. The mid to late nineteenth century was, of course, a great era for = melodrama. Brigham Young disliked what he called 'tragedy,' but certainly = saw most of the popular plays of Shakespeare in good productions. The Salt = Lake Company included a few professional actors who had joined the Church, = and the acting standard at the company is said to have been very high. So = what did Brigham mean by 'tragedy?' Did he mean Richard III, or Hamlet = (both of which were performed at the SLT)? His comments about 'tragedy' = are a bit puzzling, because very few popular plays of his day were what we = would call 'tragedies.' In context, his comments may have been a reaction = against the Gothic melodramatic tradition which saw a strong revival in = the 1860's and '70's. Or it could be he was referring to those few = melodramas in which the heroine (never the hero), dies. Bless the = decadent French, for La Dame aux Camellias and Le Demi-Monde, two Dumas = fils plays of the period, in which this happens. =20 After the joining of the railroads, Salt Lake was a popular whistlestop = for touring companies headed to California. The SLT became largely a road = house, which meant in practical terms that most of the greatest performers = of the nineteenth century, including Edwin Booth, Lily Langtry, Enrico = Caruso, Sarah Bernhardt and Joseph Jefferson, all performed for the = Saints. I haven't been able to discover if Eleanora Duse performed in = SLC, but it's not unlikely. Still, for all its reputation as a backwater, = by the last two decades of the nineteeth century, a resident of Salt Lake = would have had the opportunity to see professional theatre at a standard = New York or London would hardly have exceeded. And by then we also had = begun to develop our own local performers, people like Phillip Margetts = (who we at BYU named our most important theater after and whose name we = consistently mispronounce--it should rhyme with 'targets'), who alternated = between performing as second lead to superstars in Salt Lake and touring = up and down the Wabash front with his own company.=20 A definitive book on this subject is badly needed, and I expect will be = forthcoming from Nola Smith, who is currently the top scholar in this = area. Nola's dissertation is available, and is outstanding. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 14 Aug 2002 15:20:58 -0400 What we seem to have are two accounts of the 1978 Revelation that differ in fairly important ways. McConkie certainly implies that words were spoken and a voice was heard. Hinckley certainly implies that no words were spoken and a voice was not heard. I am struck by the irony of the exact same thing happening @ 2,000 years earlier when Saul was on the road to Damascus and got his revelation. Acts 9:7: "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." But then later on in a different version of the same revelation we read in Acts 22: 9: "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid: but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." So which is it? Did they hear the voice or didn't they? Luckily the discrepancy in Acts was reconciled by the JST when JS emended Acts 9:7 and finally set the record straight. But today, there remains some confusion about what happened in 1978, did they hear a voice or didn't they? Oh, if only we had a text, and then the prophet could set the record straight with the stroke of a pen. I don't know why I'm bothered by this, but it bugs me on an irrational level. Usually when that happens it's on the order of a prompting. I'd like to let something go, but on a level that passeth understanding, I'm not supposed to. So I keep chewing on whatever it is until I learn what I'm supposed to learn. I think it has something to do with "My house is a house of order," and this whole affair of the '78 OD has been handled sloppily from the get go. The original ban was sloppy, persisting in the practice was sloppy, and letting go of the practice was sloppy. And it remains a messy, confused corner in a house of order. Tony Markham -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cathrynlane@cs.com Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 14 Aug 2002 16:42:58 -0400 "The Outsiders" was a book that just blew me away as a teen but when I recomended it to my own teen children they didn't have any sort of connection with it. Has anyone else experienced recomending it to teens (plain as well as deliquent) and what were their reactions? It was really the "in" book among my very undeliquent teen group a million years ago. I wonder if it doesn't wear well. Cathryn Lane -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lynette Jones Subject: [AML] Invoking Emotions (was: "Choose the Rock") Date: 14 Aug 2002 08:59:08 -0600 I would love to be involved in a verbal discussion on this matter. Being involved in music all my life, I am much better at the topics discussed on this list by verbal means than this effort to be coherent in my writing. But the discussions are what I am hungry for. Being at home and not having access to any of this stuff from my family makes me really hungry, enough to try to use written words which are a great stumbling stone for me. (I really should be doing family book work instead). I have often been lectured by BYU professors at the BYU music conference that the very key that music is written in sets the emotional tone of the piece. The Greeks apparently had this down to a science, but I have not yet found where to get that information. I have also noticed that a person can get very different emotions from a piece of music than others around them. So, the profusion of music and musical styles. Music has been used to move masses. But to avoid anarchy and chaos, it has required a clear message with the use of words understood by the audience or mass. This is where the published word and spoken word have tremendous effect. I listened to some music as a teen at church dances that I really indulged in. Now, my teenage children tell me how mortifying it is to hear that music, especially when they understand the words. They tell me the words and I really do a 180. Little do these precious children know how I use to dance to such music. But then, they don't dance. They have had nothing but KBYU and a little bit of jazz and a few tastes of country and gospel since birth at home. My oldest, who heard a lot of the rock and roll, before I went into severe depression upon moving to Utah, loves to dance. Now back to depression and anger. I wonder if depression, like anger, is not really an emotion, but like Pres. Young said of anger, a form of insanity. In fact, some psychologists will say that anger is a state we achieve when we do not deal with frustration or fear properly. I have found that I can alter the physical well being of my body and control whether I am able to deal with frustration, fear, stress (worry) and sadness without anger or depression. I wonder if the term insanity should let us know that there is something wrong with the health of our bodies. In fact, is that not why we can control those two states, anger and depression with chemicals, physical exercise, or as I have found, with what I consume. I found that when I was severely depressed, that I had very powerful spiritual experiences. These were what led me to answers on healing my depression without chemical dependance. I found the best way to receive answers (spiritual experiences) at that point in my life was by the still small voice held up to a standard of daily reading from the Book of Mormon. I was desperate for those spiritual experiences. I was very aware at that time, as I try to be always, that Satan can imitate all spiritual experiences. Moses gives us a good standard and there are many others to measure our own spiritual experiences by. I have been experimenting with emotions since I noticed the statements on this list about strong emotions not necessarily being spiritual experiences. I am finding that I am trying to define what a spiritual experience really is. Anyone have a quote or a definition that really works for them? I know that I have emotions which are deeply tied to these spiritual experiences. I know that the Sorenson brothers list about 16 ways the spirit testifies to us in "Spiritual Survival for the Last Days". (That was really the only useful thing I got out of that book). I think I need to go back and read that list again and study out the scriptures that list hunger, joy, peace and stupor of thought as spiritual answers. Are those not emotions? Well, I guess, I might need to go back to the basics. We are taught in psychology that there are only two emotions, love and fear. So even hate is an expression of fear? Can hate be an expression of love? Hm-m-m that would be a stretch. Now then, can we have horror stories written by Latter-day Saints? I have a daughter who is a good writer and loves reading horror. She is truly desensitized to things that I am horrified by. So we talk about it, but have not found a common ground yet. I have wondered at the murder mysteries by Anne Perry which I have read. I finally had to just walk away from them. There is however, an audience for such things. It seems to me that most popular literature that is successful takes us through a whole series of emotions. They play on our emotions and common experiences. Even what is now classical literature indulges in such, once it gets past the layers of description which sets the stage for the emotions the author wants us to feel. Is not the way to sway folks? Do not most authors, by presenting truths and arousing emotions, good or evil about those truths? Is that not what "War and Peace" does? What about "The Christmas Carol", or "Treasure Island"? What about Plato and Buddha? They too, present truths and play on our emotions to explore the conclusions that these men want us to come to. Our emotions are tied to our most basic needs. Is it in fact, the lack of emotional exploration that makes scriptures "dry" and hard to stay awake through? By being "neutral," of emotion in most ways, the scriptures are able to reach more people. I find that I must take the things I read from most any author and lift it up to the teachings of the gospel to cut through the conclusions of the authors and the emotions they create in their story telling to discover how close they are to the gospel. It seems to me the gospel is not just a collection of truths, but a clear guide on how to use those truths. Perhaps the battle between good and evil is not always a battle to prove something true as much as the proof that a certain application of a truth is the true one, meaning the one that will bring the individual true joy. I digress . . . . The book work is done and this looks like it should be several different topics Lynette Jones -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: RE: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early Date: 14 Aug 2002 15:13:56 -0700 Some years ago I did a session on "How Wide the Divide?" with Dave Combe. That session was also covered by Deseret News, and they did a pretty fair job of it. I wish I'd kept a copy of the article. Perhaps it's on line. ----------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 14 Aug 2002 16:57:13 -0700 Tony Markham wrote: > I am struck by the irony of the exact same thing happening @ 2,000 years earlier > when Saul was on the road to Damascus and got his revelation. > > Acts 9:7: "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a > voice, but seeing no man." > > But then later on in a different version of the same revelation we read in Acts > 22: 9: "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid: but > they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." > > So which is it? Did they hear the voice or didn't they? There are no contradictions in the original Greek. Acts 22:9 that says those with him saw the light, but we learn from Acts 9:7 that they didn't see a man. In similar fashion, we learn from Acts 9:7 that those who were with Paul heard a voice, but what Acts 22:9 says in the Greek is that they did not *understand* the voice they heard. Richard Hopkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Susan Malmrose" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 14 Aug 2002 16:06:13 -0700 I loved the Outsiders as a young teen, too. I must've read it a hundred times. Of course, one of the reasons I loved it so was that the author was only 16 when it was written--and her name is Susie. :) I don't know any teens today who've read it, so can't directly answer your question, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of the other SE Hinton books might be more popular with today's teens. Rumblefish might be better. Just to throw out some other books I enjoyed as a teenager: And I Don't Want to Live This Life by Deborah Spungen (The story of Nancy Spungen, who was murdered by her boyfriend, Sid Vicious of the Sex Pistols. Written by Nancy's mother.) Ordinary People by Judith Guest 45 Mercy Street by Anne Sexton (poetry) I really loved depressing stuff. If you're looking for something fun, then I'd suggest the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. :) Susan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 14 Aug 2002 18:03:21 -0600 "Tony Markham" wrote: > McConkie certainly implies that words were spoken and a voice was heard. > Hinckley certainly implies that no words were spoken and a voice was not heard. > So which is it? Did they hear the voice or didn't they? This really doesn't matter, but there is a metaphysical counterpart to each of the senses, such as second sight, second touch, second hearing . . .. Each of these is considered a gift. Perhaps the difference can be explained this way. There were two different observers reporting on what they each observed. Each had different gifts through which they detect the spirit world, as different people often do. Each reported honestly. To me differing accounts is a stronger testimony. Paris Anderson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 14 Aug 2002 19:55:07 -0600 >Perhaps that > revelation had to wait for a time when people's hearts were in place, both > within and without the church, that it could be implemented without > endangering the greater mission of getting the church established. > I have a tough time understanding this explanation. All other churches had addressed the race issue for at least a decade before we did. We were in fact the last church to fully integrate. The rest of the religious world's hearts seemed to have been "in place" well before ours was. > I tend to lean this direction, myself. I can believe that rather than the rank and file needing to have their hearts in the right place, that it was the leaders whose ideas about social change needed to get up to speed. Not because they were necessarily racist but because it takes time for a church as heirarchal as ours to ramp up to societal change. In most societal changes that most of us now accept, the Church was at least a decade (and in some cases, two decades) behind society at large. For example, when the rest of the world was accepting the working woman, the Church was still preaching stay at home mothers. Working mothers as being acceptable has only recently become acceptable in this decade under President Hinkeley. > Whenever I hear someone saying that > the Church bowed to political pressure with the civil rights movement on the > priesthood issue, I can't help but think, "and who do you think got the > civil rights movement going in the first place?" You would never have known it at the time. Some high-level Church leaders were teaching that the Civil Rights movement was a Communist plot. >I'm sure the Lord had his > hand in it, and I think it was a way of preparing the world and members of > the Church to accept the future change in policy. I know of at least one man > who was great in many ways but raised very racist. He couldn't have handled > the change--and I imagine many otherwise great church leaders and members > would have fallen away had the ban been lifted decades earlier simply > because of attitudes at the time. It is my opinion that the rank and file of the church was ready for the priesthood change at least fifteen years before it was introduced. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rich Hammett Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 14 Aug 2002 22:06:36 -0500 (CDT) >The first thing that comes to mind is _I Am the Cheese_ by Robert >Cormier, interesting thriller, and they might respond well to the sense >of paranoia. As a side note, there is a recent "anniversary" edition of _I Am the Cheese_ in our local library, and it contains a brief forward in which Cormier describes how he wrote the book. I won't even try to paraphrase what I read a week ago, before my 3000 mile driving weekend, but the book makes more sense to me when I see how he constructed it. rich -- \ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett / rhammett@HiWAAY.net "Better the pride that resides / in a citizen of the world; \ than the pride that divides / when a colorful rag is unfurled." -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathy Wilson Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 14 Aug 2002 21:29:39 -0600 These were all such good responses and so varied that they gave me much to think about. I get to do some choosing (with a partner teacher) in the next few weeks, and will get back to you on how we did. Cathy Wilson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Carrie Pruett" Subject: [AML] Re: High School Literature Curriculum Date: 15 Aug 2002 05:22:35 +0000 This may sound like a joke, but my sister-in law taught "troubled" teens, I think at about an eighth or ninth grade level, and had them absolutely captivated by the Harry Potter books. She read out loud to them during an afternoon break period, and one of her most effective disciplinary methods earlier in the day was to threaten NOT to read Harry that afternoon. . . There have been several mentions of "Ender's Game," but personally I found the book very distasteful; I enjoy a lot of dark and violent works but I felt like I needed a shower after this one. I know it does appeal to a lot of teens and adults but I'd at least recommend prescreening it and not assuming it's okay because it's by an LDS author. I'm just thinking out loud; I've never taught teens and I wasn't very tuned in to what my peers were reading at that age; I went in big for Jane Austen and Scott Fitzgerald in the 9th grade but I doubt that's typical. Frankly, I don't remember particularly liking anything I was assigned to read in high school, and I was an "accelerated" student; I think the nature of being assigned makes it tough. . . It does seem that teens take more readily to genre fiction than "classics" but I wonder if that has something to do with not having it forced down their throat. I'm thinking about the mystery genre - would teens read Raymond Chandler or does he feel too dated? I've got no idea but this was certainly popular fiction in its day and there are worse places to learn clear prose than "The Big Sleep." That said, I don't think you can go wrong with To Kill a Mockingbird. I think Orwell's "Animal Farm" and/or "1984" might go over well, sort of straddling the scifi/lit margin; also Asimov or Bradbury. Consider including authors of various minority backgrounds - I don't want to be either overly PC or to assume that troubled kids are more likely to be minorities, I just think it's something that's particularly important for young people of any background. Tony Cade Bambara, Sandra Cisneros, and Junot Diaz are a few relatively contemporary ones that I've read recently, though I'm not sure I can speak to their appropriateness for teens. I never had much luck with LDS oriented youth fiction (I know the question wasn't specifically about church oriented material but this brings the subject to mind). I do remember reading a couple of marvelous stories in the New Era by a writer named Donald Smurthwaite (??) or something like that. In the late 80s/early 90s I guess since that's when I would have been reading the New Era I never found anything else by him; the church was mentioned in the stories but was fairly peripheral to basic issues about family and general "good values," so I'm not sure if the author was LDS or not. Though I was a little old for them when I discovered them (don't know when they were first published), I was also very impressed with the "Tennis Shoes among the Nephites" series -Book of Mormon fantasy/time travel theme. I liked the fact that the protagonist actually drank a beer (or smoked or something, I can't remember) in the beginning of the first book and the family's reaction was portrayed realistically, somewhat comically. It was the first time I'd read of such an event in an LDS story where the kid didn't end up getting in a drunk driving accident or suffering other dire consequences in the next 2 pages. carrie __ Pictures of perfection, as you know, make me sick and wicked - Jane Austen _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 15 Aug 2002 01:11:03 -0700 On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 17:59:40 -0600 Jacob Proffitt writes, replying to my comment: [Me] > > I can think of two very good examples, micro-credit lending and > > the Perpetual Education Fund. A year ago this spring I went > > to the dentist before my newly laid off dental benefits > > expired. I wondered whether to take Martin Cruz Smith's > > Stallion Gate or Muhammad Yunus's Banker to the Poor in with me. [Jacob] > Two wonderful programs. Again, though, my point is that the key to > aping poverty isn't the program, but the change of heart. And I'm > rethinking that point, really. I mean that might be well and good > in the United States, but I think both the Perpetual Education Fund > and micro-loans are good examples of programs that depend first > on people changing themselves, then leverages their determination to > lift themselves out of poverty. I'm fairly sure Muhammad Yunus would disagree with you. He does spend a lot of time talking about changing hearts and minds, the hearts and minds of the wealthy bankers and international aid organizations. That's the point of his statement that It's not people who are uncreditworthy it's banks who are unpeopleworthy. The poor already have the desire to get out of poverty, and the mindset, and the skills, what they need is the money to finance their businesses. And it's a very small amount they need, so small that bankers won't lend it to them, because the loan is not large enough to generate enough interest to interest the bankers. I don't know what Pres. Hinckley would think about the idea that the PEF "depends first on people changing themselves," because when he announced the program he said nothing about that. He talked instead about a problem confronting the Church, that a significant number of missionaries were getting significant training as leaders and teachers but were unable to use it because when they got home they went back into deep poverty and spent their engeries trying to fight against their poverty, with no means to get out of it. That is, he presented the program as an answer to the problem, 'How can the Church best help these people put to use the skills and inclinations and experience they already have?' > In other words, it seems to me that the people couldn't escape > poverty without the programs and can with them. That indicates > an inability to leave poverty without that aid. Pretty convincing. > I think it's less applicable for those of us who live in the > United States, but it certainly undermines my fundamental > argument that programs *can't* be key in the process. This is one of the things I love about AML-List, seeing people with opposite positions moving closer together. > The right attitude has to exist--that's crucial and without it > no program is going to be successful. I agree, but my point, and Yunus's, is that poverty is not a result of having the wrong attitude. Yunus has a wonderful comment about how the poor are more fiscally responsible than the rich. Grameen Bank has a 98% repayment rate, something banks for the rich can't even approach, because the poor realize that repaying the loan is their hope of getting more loans and working themselves out of poverty. The rich don't have that deep a stake in repaying their loans. If disaster strikes they can decleare bankruptcy. Grameen almost never forgives loans, even if natural disaster strikes. Instead, the bank organizes lending groups in villages, and doesn't loan to anyone in the group until there are five members who will all take out loans and give the moral support and peer pressure that helps the loan get repaid. Each lending group sets up a fund and when there's a disaster they draw on that fund to help the disaster-stricken member continue payments. He has a passage about a woman who suffered a whole string of floods and other disasters and is currently on her 12th Grameen loan. > But I'm thinking that there are instances where the right > attitude is not enough and some outside assistance is needed. I'm > relatively confident that such assistance is not needed in the U.S. > with our higher wages and existing infrastructure, but since my > fundamental argument needs amendment, I'm not opposed to > amending further. The problem with the higher wages and infrastructure is a much higher cost of living. Grameen Bank recently added a program to finance home building. The loan is $300, which won't even rent a studio apartment in Pleasant Grove for a month. Right now we have two homeless people living in our basement, just as my parents had three homeless people living in their basement 10 years ago, until my mother said one day, "It's time for you to buy a house. You've got a job and Matthew is almost two years old and doesn't need four adults telling him what to do." Sarah and David are staying with us because our bp, who has helped so much with David Jr.'s tragedy, thinks they ought to be back in the ward, and there are no apartments available yet, but when one opens up it will rent for about $650/month--twice what Donna and I were paying in expensive Seattle 12 years ago--and more than 50% again the house payment we were able to set up with my parents' help. And these aren't really spectacularly nice apartments--it's hard to find something for much less in PG. > One fundamental I *will* hold on to is that any program that > desires to help the poor escape poverty needs to be down in the > trenches with them, understand the situation thoroughly, Yunus would agree completely. He talks a lot about how he recruits borrowers by going into their homes, and how borrowers become part of Grameen staff since there are cultural strictures in Bangladesh against men visiting women who are married to other men. Grameen also works with borrowers to help them understand that giving economic power to women does not violate Islam. Yunus has some pungent comments about how international aid agencies like work, and how and why he resists The World Bank. >and bring motivation and attitude into the decision-making process Again, Yunus would disagree with this, except to the extent that Grameen targets women, on the premise that the fastest way to raise the standard of living in a family is to give economic power to the people who give primary care to the children. He sometimes has to convince women that it's ok for them to have economic power, but they already have the motivation and skills (Yunus is adamant on these two points) to pull themselves out of poverty. In the second half of the post Jacob replied to some comments I made about a posting he made June 6 in the Money Matters thread. > Well, not an entirely inappropriate message. Whether you're a > doctor, lawyer, brick layer, convenience store clerk, computer > programmer, whatever, it's by far best to have no debt at all > and invest as much as you can. > > I replied: > Anyway, after thinking about all these big corporations > cooking or half-cooking their books, words about the virtues > of investing all you can seem a little naive, and I keep > remembering the adage, 'Don't invest more than you can afford > to lose.' and Jacob clarified: > "Real" investing means allocating your money wisely. After debts > debts are paid and needed living expenses, some money should go > to savings for liquidity in emergencies. Some should go to planned > future expenses. All of it should be engaged with a goal in mind and > placed accordingly. Money is a big part of our lives and I've come > to assume that God means us to learn essential lessons from things > that large. Personally, I think the lessons involved (in learning how > money works) concern overcoming ignorance, fear, and/or greed. > Overcoming ignorance, fear, and greed is hard, but required by > wise stewardship. As such, our financial decisions should be > based on our understanding, our future needs, and our current > assets. Thanks for the clarification. > Not being able to make a living, or having to undergo the costs > of training for another career might very well be bad enough to > offset the bad of having some additional debt. Maybe. My main > point is that we acknowledge that debt is bad and that we not > make financial decisions in ignorance or based on fear or greed. I agree with the second point, but why is debt bad? There's a very strong literary connection here and it would do us some good to ponder it. In his final address to his people King Benjamin spends considerable time teaching them that they are not even as much as the dust of the earth (because they were created out of dust and aren't greater than the material they came from)--not because he wants them to think of themselves as lowly worms, but because he wants them to stop looking down upon beggars. The motif of the beggar is prominent throughout the discourse, with Benjamin pointing out at the end that they have all been begging God for a remission of their sins, and God has granted their petition. There's also a motif of debt in the sermon. In Mosiah 2:22-24 Benjamin tells them that they are indebted to God for their very lives and bodies, and can never repay the debt because every time they do something good God immediately blesses them, keeping them, and all of us perpetually indebted to God. If debt is bad is bad then this subordinate, indebted relationship to God is a bad relationship. I've often thought a capitalist might read Benjamin's address and say, "Ah, that's God's way of keeping us in subjection." Indeed, I've long thought of creating a character who rejects the missionary lessons when he reads this because he doesn't want to be in debt to God. I think he's someone like Jim and Tammy Fae Bakker who believes that wealth is a gift from God to lift us closer to Him and His Absolutely Spectacular Lifestyle (lifestyles of the really rich and famous--more famous than John, Paul, George, and Ringo combined), and he just can't accept the idea that God would keep him an eternal debtor. Or maybe Satan would say that. I caught snatches of the Satan Figures thread, and it occurred to me that Satan, being very subtile would not want to make a stark comparison between his way and Jesus's and would probably present his as a way that preserves more freedom than Jesus's. Under Jesus's plan we have to choose to be saved, but that means we don't have the freedom to choose not to be saved. Satan would say that his plan preserves freedom because we don't have to give up our freedom to choose B when we choose A instead. I'm working (sort of) on an epic fantasy about the voyage of Adam, Eve and Methuselah around the world to invite all A&E's children to a huge family reunion. Adam and Eve use the travel time to teach Methusaleh, who grew up in an apostate family, his true family history, often in the form of short epic poems. The retelling of Job is in the AML-List archives. If you want to read it, drop me a note. A second literary connection here, but first let me say that I areee with Jacob "that too many people aren't sufficiently aware of the price of debt. The payments *seem* to be small and the benefits seem large." I agree that we spend many dollars we don't have on things we don't need. I also think one of the virtues of micro-credit is the micro part, loans large enough to do what people need but small enough they can be paid off in small regular payments in a year or less. On Talk of the Nation yesterday (Aug 8) Neil Conan (the non-barbarian) asked "How will you commemmorate Sept. 11?" And one of the things I'm going to do is think about this question: If your neighbor had just been murdered would you go to your neighbor's family and say, "The best thing you can do in response is spend a grundle of money, because if you don't the murderers have won." So if I agree that debt is too much a part of our national life why do I resist so strongly the idea that debt is bad? And I think the answer to that question is literary. "A bad tree cannot bring forth good fruit," Jesus said, and I interpret that to mean that something whose essence is bad can't produce good results, but I believe that the results of both micro-credit lending and the Perpetual Education Fund are good, indeed very good, and if they are good, how can the tool that produces them, well-managed debt, be bad? Indeed, this past Sunday (Aug 11) I stopped by the meetinghouse library that has no magazines because it's a gnu gbuilding gand gasked gthe glibrarian if they had the May 2001 Ensign, and they actually did, so I took a few minutes I would otherwise have spent in Sunny Schoodle reading Pres. Hinckley's talk on the PEF, and I found this quote on page 52: "The beneficiaries will repay the money, and when they do they will enjoy a wonderful sense of freedom because they have improved their lives not through a grant of gift but through borrowing then repaying." Note that the word _freedom_ in the quote refers not to freedom from debt but to freedom from poverty. I found the quote fascinating because Pres. Hinckley sees the accomplishment of contracting and paying off a loan as better than receiving a grant or gift--he sees borrowing and repaying as a good tool. > > "But if you go out into the real world you cannot miss seeing > > that the poor are poor not because they are untrained or > > illiterate but because they cannot retain the returns of > > their labor. They have no control over capital, and it is the > > ability to control capital that gives people the power to > > rise out of poverty." --Muhammad Yunus, _Banker to the Poor_, > > p. 141. Yunus also said, It is not the poor who are > > uncreditworthy, but the banks who are unpeopleworthy. > > I'm wondering what Yunus thinks is keeping people from controlling > capital? Why can't people control the returns of their labor? > Thanks for asking. Partly because they don't own the means of production, and the cost of renting it eats up most of their earnings. I cut the quote short for length. It continues: "Profit is unabashedly biased towards capital. In their powerless state, the poor work for the benefit of someone who controls the productive assets. Why cannot they control any capital? Because they do not inherit any capital or credit and nobody gives them access to it because they are not considered creditworthy." One other comment in this too-long post. It fascinates me that the 3 oldest Abrahamic religions all have traditions against charging interest and making a living off it, but all have found they can't survive without banks and banking and loan-making. In Judaism and Christianity the strictures against interest are long-abandoned (mostly). Islam is more cognizant of the spiritual dangers of charging interest (I recently read about some Muslims searching for a mutual fund that didn't contain any stocks that made their money primarily through charging interest because their religious tradition forbids making a living through interest), but from Yunus's description there's a thriving interest industry among Muslims. What fascinates me is that the youngest Abrahamic religion, the mere 172-year-old upstart, has little or no tradition against making money from interest. There is that famous quote from J. Reuben Clark, Jr. about how interest is not human and never sleeps or shows mercy, but that's a warning against paying interest, not charging it. Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 15 Aug 2002 02:47:44 -0600 Clark Goble wrote: > I should also add that I think the postmodern movement has a lot to offer > Mormonism. You academic types love to bandy this word "postmodern" about as if the whole world knows what you're talking about. Well, it may come as a shock to you, but I've no idea what postmodernism is. How about, once and for all, someone providing us a definition of what postmodernism is? -- 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Unsavory Etymologies Date: 15 Aug 2002 03:31:44 -0600 [MOD: No chance, Michael...] I absolutely love that I'm associating with a group of Mormons who, with no qualms and a straight face, discuss the etymology of the word "f---." (Next step: get same group to feel okay about spelling the word out without hyphens.) -- 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eileen Stringer" Subject: Re: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early Date: 14 Aug 2002 18:05:15 -0600 Chris Bigelow wrote: > Meanwhile, we got much fuller-bodied Sunstone coverage over at the "new" > Tribune, with all the controversial stuff on leaving the Church, dealing > with ecclesiastical abuse, and continuing to figure out what Brigham Young's > role was in the MMM. Is it possible to post the Tribune article here as well since we received the Deseret News article here, for those of us who do not subscribe to either paper? Eileen Stringer -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 15 Aug 2002 09:35:09 -0600 I'm just amazed that no one yet has mentioned Catcher in the Rye, which is = the book that saved me when I was a kid, or the Vonnegut books, esp Cat's = Cradle, Sirens of Titen or Slaughterhouse Five. Or am I dating myself?=20 Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 15 Aug 2002 11:19:24 -0500 Let me second the motion for Kristen Randle's _The Only Alien on the Planet_ , an EXCELLENT and enthralling book! And you can not go wrong with Zenna Henderson. Everybody who reads her People stories, especially any disaffected youth or people who don't feel they completely fit in, knows that Zenna was writing about THEM pesonally. Magical stuff, and nary an offensive word. And they're bite-sized. You can get the "People" experience with just one or two 20-page short stories. Preston Hunter -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 15 Aug 2002 11:37:45 -0600 >Brigham Young actively discouraged playwriting by the Saints, and the >Salt >Lake Theatre did very few new plays by LDS playwrights; less than >five, as >I recall, none of them very successful or popular. Eric-- Could you elaborate on this? It hardly seems right to be pro-theatre and not pro-playwriting! Marianne _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 15 Aug 2002 11:48:38 -0600 (MDT) > I am struck by the irony of the exact same thing happening @ 2,000 years earlier > when Saul was on the road to Damascus and got his revelation. > > Acts 9:7: "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a > voice, but seeing no man." > > But then later on in a different version of the same revelation we read in Acts > 22: 9: "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid: but > they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." > > So which is it? Did they hear the voice or didn't they? > > Luckily the discrepancy in Acts was reconciled by the JST when JS emended Acts > 9:7 and finally set the record straight. > > Tony Markham The JST didn't need to fix it, really. This shows the ineadequacy of an English translation. The greek terms in both passages are different. In acts 9:7 it means "to hear (sound)" and Acts 22:9 it means "to hear (and understand)." --ivan wolfe -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Hansen Subject: Re: [AML] Chaim Potok Dies Date: 15 Aug 2002 12:01:39 -0600 > > > But let's not forget one salient fact: Potok was outcast from the > > orthodox Jewish community because of what he wrote. That was the > > price he paid, and it was for him a deeply painful one. I certainly > > hope that a Mormon Chaim Potok would not be excommunicated. But > > Potok, essentially, was excommunicated. A very sobering thought. > > > > Eric Samuelsen > > Eric, Could you document this? Potok was an editor for the Jewish > Publication League(Society?), his name appears in their translation of > the Hebrew Bible, and he spoke about the translation in one of his > sessions at BYU, which suggests that he was very much a part of his > religious community. He did suggest that he became a rabbi more for > intellectual reasons than spiritual, but I haven't heard anything about > Potok being as controversial as Phillip Roth or Noam Chomsky, who was > excommunicated by his synagogue when he spoke out (in the NY Times?) > against an Israeli massacre in a Palestinian refugee camp in the early > 80's. If he was as controversial as either of these authors I'd like to > read about it. I have a particular interest in authors who are cast out > or off by their culture. I don't know if this is stealing Eric's thunder, but I've been reading some of Potok's interviews on line lately. Here is one quote from the Seattle-Pacific interview posted here previously. http://www.spu.edu/depts/uc/response/Aut97/features/potok.html#1 Response: I think of Asher Lev's choice to paint the crucifixion as a metaphor for the pain experienced by his parents. As a Jewish writer, what kind of response did you receive within your own culture about this choice? Potok: It was not received well at all. The echoes of it continue to this day. I paid a high price for that book. But that's the job of a writer. You pay the price, but you have to be honest. If you're not, no one's going to pay any attention to you. And I made that decision when I was 16, 17 years old: that I would do it to the best of my ability. And I've been paying the price ever since. I mean I've paid other prices since the Asher Lev book, but that was a particularly steep price. Dave Hansen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Sunstone Panel on Missionaries Returning Early Date: 15 Aug 2002 13:05:02 -0600 The Trib ran several articles, none on our missionary panel (sorry if it sounded like they had done our panel). You could try www.sltrib.com, but the search feature hasn't been working for me. Chris Bigelow -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 15 Aug 2002 13:19:00 -0600 ___ Paris ___ | This really doesn't matter, but there is a metaphysical | counterpart to each of the senses, such as second sight, second | touch, second hearing . . .. Each of these is considered a gift. ___ !!! I don't think most accept that notion. Certainly there is the issue of distinguishing between a "virtual presentation" and a direct experience. This has been discussed in the literature and many philosophers actually argue that experience entails a repetition of our encounter. i.e. when I see I have the encounter of seeing and then I have a representation of this seeing in my mind. (Peirce argues along those lines, for instance) If we have a representation in addition to the presentation though, one can ask why once can't just have the representation. This then gets us into all those virtual reality questions that have of late become popular in Hollywood. (i.e. the holodeck in Star Trek or the _Matrix_) This obviously makes a tie between spiritual events and memory. Dennis Potter actually gave a very interesting paper on this at Sunstone. He was defending the notion of spiritual experience as a way of knowing. His argument is that if memory is somewhat untrustworthy but we rely on that, why should we treat revelation differently? If you "second sense" is really just this representation of a sense, then I'd probably agree with you. The gift in this case would be consciousness itself. I *think*, however, that you're adopting more of a New Age like discussion of the terms, which I find a little more problematic in LDS theology. That rhetoric is, of course, popular even among Mormons. (Especially in the 19th century) However I think our understanding of the phenomena is very at odds with second sight as a psychic ability. ___ Tony ___ | McConkie certainly implies that words were spoken and a voice | was heard. Hinckley certainly implies that no words were | spoken and a voice was not heard. ___ I learned very quickly on my mission that not everyone receives revelation the same way, even when it is obvious that the spirit is being experienced by all in the room. For instance I remember one company who recognized the spirit by a chill going up his spine while for me is was a general warmth and "excitement" that went through my entire body and was focused at my heart. Likewise not everyone carefully distinguishes between what are direct and indirect effects of the spirit. While giving a blessing for instance, thoughts enter ones mind but the thoughts aren't necessarily verbal even if they are expressed as such. Yet at other times I unconsciously convert such impulses into words in my mind, especially while praying at my bed. Perhaps this is what McConkie was doing and both actually were experiencing the same phenomena but simply relating how they related to that phenomena. ___ Tony ___ | Oh, if only we had a text, and then the prophet could set the | record straight with the stroke of a pen. ___ Like you, this is a pet peeve of mine. I think it tends to assume a na=EFve approach to the texts we do have. i.e. that they are something like the absolute univocal dictated word of God. When all the evidence points against that. I dislike this for two reasons. For one I think it limits how we approach the scriptures and how we let them work within our lives. Secondly I think it sets us up for anti-Mormon attacks which also tend to rely on just such a na=EFve hermeneutics. (Although more sophisticated Protestant critics note that such a view doesn't even fit the Bible) At the core is, I think, a desire to see all revelation in a manner akin to laws which lawyers encounter. The religious texts, unlike mortal texts, are the relatively univocal expression of natural law. While there is some truth to that approach to religious texts, the fact is that there are *very* different natures to legal texts and religious texts. Even in relatively legalistic portions, such as D&C 42 or the Torah. I sometimes wonder if Elder McConkie's legal background affected how he viewed scripture. And, less we forget, even within legal interpretation there are many kinds of hermeneutics -- including postmodern ones. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Russ Asplund Subject: RE: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 15 Aug 2002 13:57:52 -0600 > >Perhaps that > > revelation had to wait for a time when people's hearts were in place, > both > > within and without the church, that it could be implemented without > > endangering the greater mission of getting the church established. > > > > I have a tough time understanding this explanation. All other churches had > addressed the race issue for at least a decade before we did. We were in > fact the last church to fully integrate. The rest of the religious > world's > hearts seemed to have been "in place" well before ours was. > I think we may have been slow to catch on -- but I was talking about the how the policy came to be. At the time of Joseph and Brigham, I don't think you could say the rest of the world's religions had dealt with the race issue. This was pre-Civil war, and the US. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure you could say that is true now. In South Carolina and Georgia, at least, churches are highly segregated. Yes, two churches in town may both call themselves Baptist churches--but one is black and on is white and neither gets along particularly well or does anything together. Bob Jone's University, near where I served my mission, made BYU look like the height of ethnic diversity. That's not integrated--that's segregated. Perhaps if the revelation had come earlier that' s what we would have gotten--segregation instead of integration. That is much harder to overcome, in a way. You would never have known it at the time. Some high-level Church leaders were teaching that the Civil Rights movement was a Communist plot. Political division among church leaders is nothing new. The founding of the League of Nations was seen by some as opening the door for the spread of the gospel, and others as the chance for the Anti-Christ to rule us all. In my mind, that is because we too often "build a fence around the law," substituting our own thinking to justify God's ways, and embellishing them--instead of just accepting them for what they are. And I dare say there were plenty in the rank-and-file of the church who thought it was a plot as well. Also a lot in the mainstream of White America. Which argues against your point that everyone was ready except the leaders of the church. It is my opinion that the rank and file of the church was ready for the priesthood change at least fifteen years before it was introduced. When I was on my mission in the early eighties, there were saints in the south who still could not accept it. You may have been ready. Many of us may have been. But trust me, even when it came it was difficult for those whose culture was steeped in racial division--which is true in more of the US than you seem to believe. Russell Asplund -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 15 Aug 2002 13:57:10 -0700 Thom wrote: >Snip >I have a tough time understanding this explanation. All >other churches had addressed the race issue for at least >a decade before we did. We were in fact the last >church to fully integrate. The rest of the religious world's > hearts seemed to have been "in place" well before ours >was. >Snip You must surely be joking. Most of the rest of the world's religions still has its black membership in entirely separate congregations. And in some parts of the United States, the white congregations have even burned down the meeting houses of their black counterparts. I have been in many wards and also in temples, and have sat next to my black brothers and sisters, I never have had a problem with this and I never will. >Snip >In most societal changes that most of us now accept, the > Church was at least a decade (and in some cases, two >decades) behind society >Snip IMHO it is good that we are a little reluctant to follow after the rest of the sheep, and accept societal changes that most of us [the world) now accept(s). Just looking at corporate ethics, our educational system, our entertainment industry, and the evolution of the family, for starters, I'd say we should direct our members in another direction. I think President Hinckley is wise to keep directing us in the paths of righteousness he has always aimed for. Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Russ Asplund Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 15 Aug 2002 14:19:57 -0600 > Or maybe Satan would say that. I caught snatches of the Satan Figures > thread, and it occurred to me that Satan, being very subtile would not > want to make a stark comparison between his way and Jesus's and would > probably present his as a way that preserves more freedom than Jesus's. > Under Jesus's plan we have to choose to be saved, but that means we don't > have the freedom to choose not to be saved. Satan would say that his plan > preserves freedom because we don't have to give up our freedom to choose > B when we choose A instead. > Odd connection to the music thread. One of my favorite singers, Robyn Hitchcock, has a song called "Judas Sings (Jesus and Me)" that addresses exactly that theme. Chorus: "Nobody loves you/But Jesus and Me/I have my reasons/So does he/I want your money, but he wants your soul." It is a good example of the type of song that is often misinterpreted by Mormon's--because you are not necessarily supposed to believe what the narrator of the song is saying. Since the narrator is saying the greed is more predictable, and therefore better than love--and I don't think Robyn himself would agree with that. Neil Conan (the non-barbarian) Oh, great, you just made me spill my Diet Coke. ;-) No throwing in bad puns without a warning. Russell Asplund -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Mary Jane Jones" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 15 Aug 2002 14:17:22 -0600 As a teen I loved A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith. Catcher in the = Rye didn't mean as much to me as did Franny and Zooey, also by JD = Salinger. One of my HS lit teachers introduced us to a lot of Russian and = African lit - I especially enjoyed Fathers and Sons by Turgenev and Things = Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe. =20 Mary Jane Ungrangsee -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 15 Aug 2002 14:47:37 -0600 >For example, when the rest of the world was accepting the working >woman, the Church was still preaching stay at home mothers. Working >mothers >as being acceptable has only recently become acceptable in this decade >under >President Hinkeley. Thom, the church is *still* preaching stay at home mothers (I refer you to the Proclamation on the Family). Perhaps people are more sympathetic to those who *must* work outside of the home, but I don't think you can say that then they preached stay at home mothers and now they don't. Marianne Hales Harding _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 15 Aug 2002 14:57:15 -0600 Jim Faulconer has a great introduction on his web page too that is more relevant to LDS people. I think I posted this last week, but will give it once again as it really is a great paper. http://www.nd.edu/~rpotter/pomo.html Here's an other set of definitions: http://www.colorado.edu/English/ENGL2012Klages/pomo.html This tends to adopt more the artistic sense of postmodernism, although the artistic sense is related to the philosophical sense. It is the conflating of these two approaches that sometimes causes all the debate which we saw last week. The following is an other good link, although I tend to agree with much less on this page. It comes from more of a religious vantage. http://www.geocities.com/athens/pantheon/3675/whatis.html One paragraph I like from the above is the following: The modern question, "Prove to me that God exists. I won't believe it until you prove it" has been replaced by the postmodern question: "I'm not sure if God exists or not. And if he does, the only way I can know that is if I experience him. How does one experience God?" Not only are these two different questions but even "how" we answer the questions are different. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 15 Aug 2002 15:03:45 -0600 >>Brigham Young actively discouraged playwriting by the Saints, and the = >Salt=20 >>Lake Theatre did very few new plays by LDS playwrights; less than >five, = as=20 >>I recall, none of them very successful or popular. Eric-- >Could you elaborate on this? It hardly seems right to be pro-theatre = and=20 >not pro-playwriting! Well, again, I made an assertion without evidence, because that's I wasn't = in the library when I asserted. I know it's true, though; there was = something of a battle over this issue in, I believe, the '70's. It's not at all incongruous. Playwriting is, by it's very nature, = subversive. Brigham Young was not interested in subversive literature. = He wanted 'safe' mainstream entertainment, not works written from, for, or = about the culture. =20 Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 15 Aug 2002 15:28:24 -0600 "Hatchet" by Gary Paulsen is a really good one. It's the story of a boy who survives a plane wreak, then has to survive a year of solitude in the wilderness. At least for me (a troubled teen who is going gray) when it was over I felt like a surviver too. Paris Anderson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: RE: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 15 Aug 2002 22:31:33 -0500 At 02:33 PM 8/13/02, you wrote: > It isn't God dictating. >(At least it never has been for me) > >Most often what happens is that we study something out and get guidance in >our study and the a kind of confirmation of the final product. Um, at great risk of being called puffed up or holier-than-thou or some other epithet, I _have_ heard God dictate quite clearly on occasion, actually. But most of the time it is a feeling or confirmation or what-have-you, accompanied by the witness of the Spirit. Therefore I believe it could go either way, whichever is appropriate for the occasion. Linda =============== Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Blair TREU, _Little Secrets_ Date: 15 Aug 2002 16:48:00 -0500 Tom Baggaley: RAVES ALL AROUND for Little Secrets. Excellent film!!!!! In my opinion, Blair Treu is the best LDS director out there among directors only making family-friendly features films. A special rave for film editor Jerry Stayner. Wow!!! He was able to take the performance of a girl who didn't know how to play violin and was able to make even a musician like myself be able to believe that she was a child prodigy, a virtuoso. I don't know if it would have convinced an actual string player, but he did an excellent job nonetheless. The film is receiving a limited nationwide release =96 meaning it may or may not be released in your city. However, based on how it does in its first run theaters, that will determine a lot about the film' future as far as releases in other cities, video/DVD release and potential television broadcasts of the film. Inside joke - Emily, the character who is the focus of the film, supposedly has a crush on composer Kurt Bestor, who actually appears in the film on a televised orchestra performance she watches. In this performance, he is supposedly collaborating with Samuel Cardon, who Emily also thinks is the best =96 although not as dreamy as Kurt Bestor. The funny thing is that Sam Cardon actually scored the film =96 not Kurt Bestor. Okay, they poke a little fun and Kurt's picture appears in all kinds of places throughout the film =96 complete with lipstick marks =96 but really... Kurt Bestor? I knew teenage girls had strange tastes. Later in the film, another character refers to Bestor as a "middle-aged composer" -- a line actually written in fun by the director, Blair Treu. Salt Lake City and Provo locals will also recognize several of the locations where the film was shot =96 although the film does not specifically mention being set in Utah. One point Treu made at the preview last night is that if we want to see more and better-funded family-friendly films come out of Hollywood, these films must be supported in the theaters =96 specifically in the first-run theaters, not the dollar movies =96 and he wasn't talking about just his film, but all family-oriented films. Unfortunately, most families are fiscally responsible enough to be patient for the films to reach the dollar movies or the video release. However, the studios don't make as much money off of dollar-theater releases or video and base their decisions on how films do in first-run theaters, so it's important that good films with a moral are supported in this first run. So those concerned with such issues might reevaluate which movies they are willing to pay first-run prices for. [Tom Baggaley] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 15 Aug 2002 23:07:38 -0500 At 03:42 PM 8/14/02, you wrote: >"The Outsiders" was a book that just blew me away as a teen but when I >recomended it to my own teen children they didn't have any sort of >connection with it. Has anyone else experienced recomending it to teens >(plain as well as deliquent) and what were their reactions? It was really >the "in" book among my very undeliquent teen group a million years ago. I >wonder if it doesn't wear well. > >Cathryn Lane I recently re-read it. It is very 60's with 60's slang and issues, and--though I recommended it first & still do--it might be too dated, now that I think about it. She also sidesteps around sexual issues that would be more directly confronted in more current books (one of the brothers probably got a girl pregnant, but it's sure veiled in the text), and uses no actual bad language (substituting "Glory" for the other capital-G word, for example, which I didn't mind.). Maybe it's too tame now, though it certainly wasn't when it was printed. It was controversial as all get-out when it first came out. If the kids can get past laughing over the descriptions of what was the grooviest car back then--or if you read it aloud and automatically update the cool clothing and hairstyle descriptions(and slang) to fit our decade--they might get into it. After all, it's a story about three brothers living dirt-poor after their parents die, with the oldest trying really hard not to lose his siblings to foster homes. Issues some of them could relate to. <<>> As for _Ender's Game,_ I'm scratching my head at what was wrong with it, there? I just read it a couple of months ago and am still amazed by it. (I keep meaning to write a review for the List and haven't.) What about it, exactly, bothered you? Do you mind me asking? I ask meaning that I honestly want to understand, that's all, not to judge anyone's taste. I've read many of Card's books and _Ender's Game_ was one of the most tame blood & gore-wise, language & sex-wise (aside from the Alvin Maker series, which still has its moments) of those I've read, but I've had to concede it was also the most incredible and amazing, and (I felt) deserving of the awards it received. And thinking on this thread more, reading the other responses, I second the motion to read Harry Potter aloud, and keep the lists oriented more toward genre books than "classics," and allowing them to pick from a large list rather than assigning specific books. I was never a delinquent myself, and even I rebelled at anything I was assigned to read or TOLD I ought to read--I still do. [Side tangent: That's why it took me so many years to read _Ender's Game_ in the first place, because everyone said it was wonderful and don't miss it. Now I'm sorry I waited, and I have four more books to read to catch up! Regretfully, grudgingly, I offer that it was his best book after all. Although, I have yet to read all of his works. Some simply don't interest me (Lost Boys, the Homebound Series).] Anyway, rare was the book I "had to read" in high school, OR college, that I actually liked. "A Tale of Two Cities" stands out as my exception to that rule. Linda ============================ Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lwilkins@fas.harvard.edu Subject: [AML] Orem Center Street Theatre: production schedule Date: 16 Aug 2002 03:14:20 -0400 Quoting Thom Duncan : > Will you be coming back? Because we'll have a complete season running > through August of next year. > > Thom > There's a good chance I'll be back in Utah before next August. Perhaps if I knew more about the 'complete season' I'd be even more incentivized...? You have other productions in the works, I presume? --Laraine -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Salt Lake Children's Film Festival Date: 16 Aug 2002 09:53:34 -0500 Article in Salt Lake Tribune: http://www.sltrib.com/08162002/friday/762260.htm Excerpt from SLTrib article: "All five films feature children in lead roles; all are rated G or PG and are suitable for kids of all ages. None of them have big-name stars. But all carry subtle -- or not-so-subtle -- positive messages advocating honesty, loyalty and decency in the face of temptation. And almost all were made in Utah by Utah filmmakers." Mentioned are: "Little Secrets" directed by Blair Treu "Princess and the Pea" directed by Mark Swan "No More Baths" directed by Timothy J. Nelson "The Penny Promise" directed by T.C. Christensen and Timothy J. Nelson "Children on Their Birthdays" directed by Mark Medoff. All of these directors are Latter-day Saints, except Medoff. (Medoff was nominated for an Academy Award for writing "Children of a Lesser God." Medoff was born in Illinois. I don't know his religious affiliation/background is.) Film descriptions "Princess and the Pea" (World Premiere) Feature Films for Families In this spectacular animated feature, stopping the King's scheming brother Laird, from gaining control of the ancient kingdom of Corazion can only be done with the power of a pure heart. Rated G. "Children on their Birthdays" (World Premiere) Crusader Entertainment Based on master American story-teller Truman Capote's 1947 short story of two boys' friendship and a couple of strangers who would change their lives forever. Rated PG. "Little Secrets" (World Premiere) Samuel Goldwyn/Tristar A heart-warming story of a girl who, for a small fee, keeps secrets and offers advice to guilt-stricken neighborhood kids. But what happens when she has secrets of her own? A poignant examination of growing up. Rated PG. "The Penny Promise" New Movie Corp. In this comedy with a conscience, Will Duncan, a science teacher with a heart for the truth (and the Judge's daughter), demonstrates why honesty should be everybody's policy even if he has to go to jail to honor a promise. Rated G. "No More Baths" Movies 99, Inc. When they come to the aid of a friend in need, Keagan McPhie, and the Glenwood Springs Kids Corp. remind their parents of the importance of being their brother's keeper by standing up for what they believe is right. Rated G. "Real Stories" Spy Hop/Sundance Institute Nine short films by young filmmakers participating in Sundance Institute's Youth Documentary Workshop at Spy Hop Productions. Rated PG. More info and schedule: http://www.ksl.com/TV/zads/slcff/ -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: KGrant100@aol.com Subject: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 16 Aug 2002 10:44:22 EDT Hi all, Yesterday a friend at work asked me to recommend to her some books (fiction or nonfiction) on the restoration and growth of the early LDS church. She's a wonderful, intelligent lady who converted from Christianity to Judaism some years ago. (I was a little surprised at her specific request, but I'd also been praying for opportunities to share the gospel, so this is interesting :) ) The Work and the Glory came to mind, but I haven't read it, and I've heard both positive and negative comments about it. I also wondered about Margaret Young's books (Standing on the Promises) and Winds of War. I'd be interested in any comments on these books, as well as suggestions for other books. I'd like to choose books that would make it more likely that she'd gain a testimony, rather than less likely :) ) Thanks! Kathy Grant -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Carter Subject: RE: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 14 Aug 2002 13:51:25 -0800 >===== Original Message From "Clark Goble" ===== Indeed many of the significant sections >of the D&C with respect to doctrine are taken from notes of Joseph's sermons >which are very fragmentary in nature. Most of what we take to be so unique >about Mormons are primarily what we call the Navuoo doctrines. But the >Nauvoo doctrines are themselves doctrines that appear to have evolved >somewhat and which never appear in anything like a primary revelation. >Rather it seems that Joseph studied a lot out in his mind and then got >confirmation. Being ignorant, I was pleased as punch to read this. I have been bothered for some time by the seeming washing out of Christ's character in the Doctrine and Covenants. The witty, trenchant, mystical yet practical man I like so much in the New Testament, seems to have donned a three piece suit, strapped on a Rolex and taken up accounting in the Doctrine and Covenants (no offense to accounters, whose dilligence and patience is light years beyond mine). He is pretty windy in the Book of Mormon too, but not as bad as he seems to be in the Doctrine and Covenants. Before this very pleasant moment, I had wondered if people really do lose their personality once they get ressurrected. At the bottom of my heart I believed that they didn't, but most portrayls of heavenly beings leave a lot to be desired in the character department. When I meet God, I hope he makes fun of the knot I used to tie my heavenly robe closed. Stephen Carter Fairbanks, Alaska -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Rachel Ann Nunes" Subject: [AML] Stansfield Writer's Workshop Date: 16 Aug 2002 09:24:53 -0600 Thought some of you might be interested in this workshop offered by Anita Stansfield, who is a very popular, best-selling author in the LDS market. Rachel ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Key to the Kingdom Productions presents-- A day with award-winning, best-selling author, Anita Stansfield If you've always had a story inside of you, nagging to come forward, this is your opportunity to unlock your own creative powers and learn to express your thoughts effectively. Saturday, August 24th, 2002 Provo Library at Academy Square 550 North University Avenue, Provo Registration 8:30 a.m. Workshops from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Handouts provided $99.00 at the door or $89.00 with preregistration. Student discounts available. For more information call 229-1650 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 16 Aug 2002 11:56:16 -0600 Postmodernism is a name given to a collection of ideas that came about when the High Modernists realized that the Enlightenment kind of failed, that Empire failed, that WWI was not the war to end all wars, and that all the rules and structures people tried to create and impose upon the world failed to adequately describe and explain it. In short, postmodernism is the realization that any claims that human intellect or human processes or human modes of understanding fail to grasp the fullness of things, and than any person who claims to offer some all-inclusive theory or approach or method is probably deluded. LDS faith says much the same thing. God's ways are not man's ways, and trying to comprehend Divinity without the help of the Spirit will only result in apostasy. I hope that helps D. Michael so he won't feel like us academic types are bandying so much anymore. But of course, any good postmodernist, would immediately attack my definition, and try to assert their own. -- Todd -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 15 Aug 2002 22:17:18 -0600 ---Original Message From: Harlow Clark > > I'm fairly sure Muhammad Yunus would disagree with you. He > does spend a lot of time talking about changing hearts and > minds, the hearts and minds of the wealthy bankers and > international aid organizations. That's the point of his > statement that It's not people who are uncreditworthy it's > banks who are unpeopleworthy. The poor already have the > desire to get out of poverty, and the mindset, and the > skills, what they need is the money to finance their > businesses. I don't think those are givens. Many of the poor don't have the mindset or skills. Some do, but certainly not all, and certainly not as a given. One of the greatest innovations of the 20th century is non-humbling poverty. It used to be that the poor would become humble in their affliction and experience a form of spiritual rebirth as a result. That happens still, but I think a part of our current hardening of hearts includes a certain pride and greed in poverty. To accompany our pride and greed in wealth, of course. > I don't know what Pres. Hinckley would think about the idea > that the PEF "depends first on people changing themselves," > because when he announced the program he said nothing about > that. Sure he did. He said it would be under the direction of local leaders who would work closely with those receiving funds from the PEF. > > In other words, it seems to me that the people couldn't escape > > poverty without the programs and can with them. That indicates > > an inability to leave poverty without that aid. Pretty convincing. > > I think it's less applicable for those of us who live in the > > United States, but it certainly undermines my fundamental > > argument that programs *can't* be key in the process. > > This is one of the things I love about AML-List, seeing > people with opposite positions moving closer together. As long as we have honest discourse and movement isn't all one-sided, I agree. > Yunus has some pungent > comments about how international aid agencies like work, and > how and why he resists The World Bank. I'll back him all the way against The World Bank--proudly entrenching poverty world-wide. > >and bring motivation and attitude into the decision-making process > > Again, Yunus would disagree with this, except to the extent > that Grameen targets women, on the premise that the fastest > way to raise the standard of living in a family is to give > economic power to the people who give primary care to the > children. He sometimes has to convince women that it's ok for > them to have economic power, but they already have the > motivation and skills (Yunus is adamant on these two points) > to pull themselves out of poverty. That may be the case in Grameen. It is hardly a given, and not something I find in the U.S. > > > > Not being able to make a living, or having to undergo the costs > > of training for another career might very well be bad enough to > > offset the bad of having some additional debt. Maybe. My main > > point is that we acknowledge that debt is bad and that we not > > make financial decisions in ignorance or based on fear or greed. > > I agree with the second point, but why is debt bad? There's a > very strong literary connection here and it would do us some > good to ponder it. > > In his final address to his people King Benjamin spends > considerable time teaching them that they are not even as > much as the dust of the earth (because they were created out > of dust and aren't greater than the material they came > from)--not because he wants them to think of themselves as > lowly worms, but because he wants them to stop looking down > upon beggars. The motif of the beggar is prominent throughout > the discourse, with Benjamin pointing out at the end that > they have all been begging God for a remission of their sins, > and God has granted their petition. > > There's also a motif of debt in the sermon. In Mosiah 2:22-24 > Benjamin tells them that they are indebted to God for their > very lives and bodies, and can never repay the debt because > every time they do something good God immediately blesses > them, keeping them, and all of us perpetually indebted to God. Interesting. We *are* indebted to God. But I don't think that is an endorsement of debt, per se. Nor do I think King Benjamin would encourage us to enter willingly into debt. The debtor image here reminds us of our supplicant nature. We owe him everything and this knowledge should inspire gratitude and service. > So if I agree that debt is too much a part of our national > life why do I resist so strongly the idea that debt is bad? > And I think the answer to that question is literary. "A bad > tree cannot bring forth good fruit," Jesus said, and I > interpret that to mean that something whose essence is bad > can't produce good results, but I believe that the results of > both micro-credit lending and the Perpetual Education Fund > are good, indeed very good, and if they are good, how can the > tool that produces them, well-managed debt, be bad? Indeed, > this past Sunday (Aug 11) I stopped by the meetinghouse > library that has no magazines because it's a gnu gbuilding > gand gasked gthe glibrarian if they had the May 2001 Ensign, > and they actually did, so I took a few minutes I would > otherwise have spent in Sunny Schoodle reading Pres. > Hinckley's talk on the PEF, and I found this quote on page 52: > > "The beneficiaries will repay the money, and when they do > they will enjoy a wonderful sense of freedom because they > have improved their lives not through a grant of gift but > through borrowing then repaying." > > Note that the word _freedom_ in the quote refers not to > freedom from debt but to freedom from poverty. I found the > quote fascinating because Pres. Hinckley sees the > accomplishment of contracting and paying off a loan as better > than receiving a grant or gift--he sees borrowing and > repaying as a good tool. But it isn't the debt that bears the fruit, it is the people using it to accomplish something good. It'd be far better if they could do so without having to resort to debt. As I said above, debt can be used to accomplish our purposes. Too often, this is nowhere near the case and debt is a weak choice entered for frivolous reasons. Sometimes debt is the best way to accomplish a goal. But that doesn't mean it is good--only that it is the best of all the other options. The goal might be worthwhile (in the case of PEF it certainly is), and we can be happy we have tools to accomplish them and rejoice that others may use those tools to escape poverty. But that doesn't equate to an endorsement of that tool. > > I'm wondering what Yunus thinks is keeping people from controlling > > capital? Why can't people control the returns of their labor? > > > Thanks for asking. Partly because they don't own the means of > production, and the cost of renting it eats up most of their > earnings. I cut the quote short for length. It continues: > "Profit is unabashedly biased towards capital. In their > powerless state, the poor work for the benefit of someone who > controls the productive assets. Why cannot they control any > capital? Because they do not inherit any capital or credit > and nobody gives them access to it because they are not > considered creditworthy." But credit and inheritance aren't the only ways to obtain capital. The business world in the U.S. is full of people who arrived here with *no* capital and went from there to acquire it. Poor people can build or buy capital--assuming a foundation of the rule of law and no artificial barriers to entry. That might not be the case in Grameen, but it is in the U.S. > One other comment in this too-long post. It fascinates me > that the 3 oldest Abrahamic religions all have traditions > against charging interest and making a living off it, but all > have found they can't survive without banks and banking and > loan-making. I'm not so sure of that. The actual term used in the KJV is usury. Which isn't the same as interest at all. I'm not sure how valid a translation that is, or if the distinction has persisted over time, but I see a huge difference between usury and charging interest on a loan. That difference is even encoded in our laws (which is why loan sharking exists as a crime). > In Judaism and Christianity the strictures > against interest are long-abandoned (mostly). Islam is more > cognizant of the spiritual dangers of charging interest (I > recently read about some Muslims searching for a mutual fund > that didn't contain any stocks that made their money > primarily through charging interest because their religious > tradition forbids making a living through interest), but from > Yunus's description there's a thriving interest industry > among Muslims. What fascinates me is that the youngest > Abrahamic religion, the mere 172-year-old upstart, has little > or no tradition against making money from interest. There is > that famous quote from J. Reuben Clark, Jr. about how > interest is not human and never sleeps or shows mercy, but > that's a warning against paying interest, not charging it. Or as Spencer W. Kimball put it "Those who understand interest earn it, those who don't pay it." Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 16 Aug 2002 13:00:31 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- > > Thom, the church is *still* preaching stay at home mothers (I refer you to > the Proclamation on the Family). Perhaps people are more sympathetic to > those who *must* work outside of the home, but I don't think you can say > that then they preached stay at home mothers and now they don't. The tone has changed, become more conciliatory. Benson's infamous talk of the 80's was a clear mandate to women with young children to leave the working world. President Hinkeley's public statements have at least included the idea that sometimes women have to work, which go a long away in reducing the previous stigma against working mothers that had been developing since the 50's. IOW, though still discouraged, it's more acceptable for women to work outside the home than it has been in the past. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 16 Aug 2002 13:17:05 -0600 Okay, let me toss out a question I don't know the answer to, because some = of y'all do have an expertise in this area that I don't. I remember when I was a kid really liking the Outsiders too. Shared it = with my kids, and they thought it was funny; dated and phony and unreal. = I had much the same experience a few years ago with my students at BYU. = Showed them West Side Story, which I always have liked and which I think = is sort of interestingly stylized. They hooted. They thought the gangs = were, their word, "gay," by which I think they meant sort of ludicrous and = silly, not necesarily specifically SSA. Here's the thing, these are two = texts that are intentionally 'youth oriented,' works that specifically are = intended to speak to young people. And the young people I know find them = funny. Have you guys noticed this phenomenon? What constitutes datedness? What = makes one book resonate with succeeding generations, while another just = feels like it came out of a museum? And why do so many works we liked as = young people just not speak to young people today? Goes without saying that what's hip and cool to one generation looks real = dated to the next. In WSS, for example, those dancing street gangs = singing 'gotta rocket in your pocket, stay cooly cool boy," which may have = seemed all slangy and with it in the '50's, seem pretty funny to kids = raised on hip hop. And yet they still sort of like Rebel Without a Cause, = which is every bit as dated. They're willing to forgive its datedness, = because, well, why? Because James Dean's a hottie? (That was the opinion = of one young lady in my class). I do know that I wouldn't have kids today = read the Outsiders, not because it's a bad book, but because a conflict = involving who's going to fight in the local 'rumble' is going to seem = tremendously dated. And yet Catcher in the Rye invokes a specific time and place and kids = today still love it as much as I did. I'd have 'em read A Heartbreaking = Work of Staggering Genius, for example. I think the harsh language in = that book would not trouble today's youth, and it's a great book in so = many other ways, they'd probably love it. =20 It's an interesting question; what's supposed to be cool, and what really = is. I see it in the two recent Star Wars movies, which I think are = supposed to be hip and cool and are supposed to connect to 'youth,' but = the youth I know are bored by them, and the audiences I've seen have been = fortiesh. Kids much prefer the Matrix, the first of which was a wonderful = movie, and a great religious movie. But a lot of kids I know love, = currently, the Blade movies, which are awful. And yet kids absolutely = love Lord of The Rings (I mean the movie, though it's also turning them on = to the book). As well they might; it's a magnificent movie (it just blows = me away to think that anyone, absolutely anyone could have thought that a = competant but utterly conventional biopic like A Beautiful Mind was a = better picture, by any standard, than Lord of the Rings. Let alone Moulin = Rouge, Gosford Park or Memento.) So kids today can respond to a frankly = fairly old-fashioned film like Lord of the Rings, provided that it's done = as brilliantly as Peter Jackson did LOTR. =20 Of course us middle-aged types don't know what's cool. I am not, as my = daughter reminds me, a happenin' dude. I'm convinced that kids will find = the stuff that really speaks to them. Just remember, if we thought it was = current and cool and a good book for Today's Youth, we're almost certainly = wrong.=20 I do know a few things, though, about kids. First of all, if it has a = good wholesome message aimed at today's youth, they're almost certainly = going to hate it. If it features a tragic death, they'll like it disproportionate to its = actual quality, the way teenage girls twenty years ago loved Charly, and = boys loved Brian's Song. =20 Mostly, they won't be bothered by stuff that we parent types are bothered = by, like harsh language or violence. =20 Any book that uses a lot of slang is going to seem tremendously dated, and = they won't like it at all; in fact, they'll think it's funny. Kids like an exciting story, and are surprisingly willing to wade through = a bit of prose to get the story. Jane Austen still reads well, though = she's wordy by today's standard. Though kids today do like the movie = better. Don't tell 'em it's a classic. Tune out city. Any other observations? Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 16 Aug 2002 14:27:15 -0600 Stephen Carter wrote: When I meet God, I hope he makes > fun of the knot I used to tie my heavenly robe closed. I know the Dude, and that's not what He'll be making fun of. (He does have X-ray vision, you know.) Paris Anderson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael McFunk (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Re: _The Other Side of Heaven_ (Review) Date: 19 Aug 2002 13:11:17 -0500 I'm writing to let you know I've met the son of the mission pres. that wanted all the records. I knew the brother of that mission pres. before he died. There were 5 brothers 2 of who lived in my Stake of the mission pres. I know a member of my ward that was a missionary under that mission pres. and he says that what he saw in the film was true. In my ward is also a family from the islands and the people of the islands in the movie are their relatives. They also say that the movie is very much correct. The only thing to add was that when he was asked if the rats did eat on his feet he said yes. From the tongans in our ward that were there when he and Pres. Stone where there they said that the eating was common. They ate the hard part of the feet at night. Also they said that the missionary did fight the boat people for the disrepect to the women shown in the movie. Michael W. McFunk -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "robert lauer" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 16 Aug 2002 17:07:18 -0400 Regarding POSTMODERNISM, Todd Peterson wrote: >Postmodernism is a name given to a collection of ideas that came about >when the High Modernists realized that the Enlightenment kind of failed, >that Empire failed, that WWI was not the war to end all wars, and that >all the rules and structures people tried to create and impose upon the >world failed to adequately describe and explain it. > >In short, postmodernism is the realization that any claims that human >intellect or human processes or human modes of understanding fail to >grasp the fullness of things, and than any person who claims to offer >some all-inclusive theory or approach or method is probably deluded. > >LDS faith says much the same thing. God's ways are not man's ways, and >trying to comprehend Divinity without the help of the Spirit will only >result in apostasy. I beg to differ. What Todd Peterson has offered above is the classical Christian "understanding" of things--which comes from the traditonal orthdox interpretation of certain Biblical passages. The LDS faith--being a rdaical departure from orthodoxy--states, in fact, just the opposite and therefore contradicts Postmodernism as presented by Todd. "A man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge" taught Joseph Smith, showing that knowledge of an existent was indeed achievable. "Truth is a knowledge of things as they were, as they are and as they are to come," states the Doctrine and Covenants. This passage clearly defines truth as a knowledge of what actually exists. Existence exists independent of consciousness, either human or divine; it has a particular nature that is not open to personal interpretaion. In short, existence is an OBJECTIVE reality and not a subjective experience. It is knowledge of this objective reality that saves one, for only by having an accurate knowledge of one's nature, the nature of existents outside of one's self and the relationship of one to the other, can one determine what actions will lead to one's eternal progression. I maintain that orthodox Christian theology is inherently very "postmodern" (or visa versa) because neither trusts man's rational abilities. Mormonism, on the other hand, by equating man's nature with God's nature, by teaching that knowledge and action (as opposed to faith) lead to exaltation and by teaching that ALL existence (physical and spiritual) is both material and uncreated/eternal, is not only unorthodox but even more spectacularly the opposite of Postmodernism. Postmoderm strikes me as nothing more than the late 20th century secular incaration of the philosophy that dominated the Christianity of the Dark Ages. ROB. LAUER _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] New Sugar Beet Date: 16 Aug 2002 15:16:40 -0600 Mirth Control for Mormons Gentle Ribbing for Your Pleasure 99% Effective if Used Correctly Now awaiting you at http://thesugarbeet.com/: Tabernacle Choir to Cover "Stairway" Committee Formed to Honor Pioneers of 1997 Missionaries Rename Book of Mormon Missouri Joins in Temple Celebration Church of Latter-Day Babes Gaining Popularity BYU-Idaho Students Relieved Austin Powers Movies Are Not R-Rated Single Public Slipup Destroys Numerous Testimonies Stake President's Wife Thwarts Unrighteous Dominion with Feminist Literature Church Vindicates Area Woman's Efforts Elvis Presley Accepts Posthumous Baptism "Cutest Guy in Ward" Somehow Doesn't Date Much Plus departments and columns http://thesugarbeet.com/ ----- Read about the Sugar Beet at BYU's NewsNet: Read a new article about the Sugar Beet at Salt Lake City Weekly: Make a donation to help with Sugar Beet web-hosting fees: https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=chris%40thesugarbeet.com&item_name=Th e+Sugar+Beet Send your comments or news tips to chris@thesugarbeet.com. To stop receiving Sugar Beet updates, reply to this message with REMOVE in the subject header. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 16 Aug 2002 21:47:18 -0700 on 8/15/02 1:47 AM, D. Michael Martindale at dmichael@wwno.com wrote: > Clark Goble wrote: > >> I should also add that I think the postmodern movement has a lot to offer >> Mormonism. > > You academic types love to bandy this word "postmodern" about as if the > whole world knows what you're talking about. Well, it may come as a > shock to you, but I've no idea what postmodernism is. How about, once > and for all, someone providing us a definition of what postmodernism is? I'm afraid the definition is almost as controversial as the "method." Believers will give their pet definitions and detractors the opposite. Since I'm a detractor you can trust me to give you a derogatory definition. I would call it sort of savage version of solipism. A sort of critic's paradise of meaninglessness. It rejects the concept of intrinsic worth, value, and meaning, making it similar to moral relativism in the broadest sense. Postmodernism assumes that nobody knows anything, nor can know anything since there is no real knowledge. Everything is context and opinion and prejudice. This is fine for atheists, I suppose, but I never read anything at all without a sort of spiritual question mark over my head and the Spirit does after all testify of truth--all truth, all the time. Unfortunately that doesn't mean that I always listen, but there are a great many things in the unlikeliest places that are very certainly true. I don't and won't buy the idea that the Holy Ghost's point of view is relative and can be deconstructed. So in the end it's just a means for intellectuals to look down their snoots at poor uninformed plebes or even worse philistine burgesses. Doesn't impress me in the slightest. If you're worried that my opinion is too biased, don't worry. There are plenty of others who will disagree with me most vehemently. Jim Wilson aka The Laird Jim -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 16 Aug 2002 22:55:51 -0700 I have to add to the list of books for teens (as a teen I read the ones that have been suggested and really liked them, adding SIDDARTHA to that list) but these are fairly recent publications that teens I know have read and discussed (I've read them too, and loved them all): HOLES by Louis Sachar (Yearling Books, May 2000) - meant as a children's book, I think, but has themes teens relate to and is complex and interesting enough to hold their attention. The story centers around Stanley who is sentenced to a boy's correctional facility where he has to dig 5 ft. deep holes every day. Icky adult authority figures get theirs in the end. My teens really liked it. STARGIRL by Jerry Spinelli (Knopf, August 2000) - spawned a very interesting discussion among 15-17 year olds in my youth group...is Stargirl a Christ figure? The book is written from a guy's point of view about his first girlfriend in high school. My fifteen year old still has Stargirl moments where she throws pocket change around parking lots, mostly quarters. BOY'S LIFE by Robert R. McCammom (Pocket Books, May 1992)- A tale of a year in the life of an 11 year old who witnesses the disposal of a murder victim with his father. There is danger and adventure, but written with unusual wit. Four teen boys I know howled during the wasps-in-the-church "nose grape" scene. You'll have to read it to see. Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 16 Aug 2002 15:58:03 -0700 Preston: Let me second the motion for Kristen Randle's _The Only Alien on the Planet_ , an EXCELLENT and enthralling book! "Aye!" > And you can not go wrong with Zenna Henderson. Everybody who > reads her People stories, especially any disaffected youth > or people who don't feel they completely fit in, knows that > Zenna was writing about THEM pesonally. Magical stuff, and > nary an offensive word. And they're bite-sized. You can get > the "People" experience with just one or two 20-page short > stories. There were not enough stories of the People written. As a small child (I have no idea how old but the movie came out in 1972 when I was seven) I saw a little of a made-for-tv-movie of "The People" (That was its title, I believe) before I was shooed off to bed and it haunted me all my life. The children shuffled their feet in the dust, not even lifting their feet off the ground, on their way to school. My mother describes me as never having walked anywhere -- I always ran, so seeing children trudging along like that shocked me to the core, but I found I also related to it because of the emotional echo in my own heart. Later, with the encouragement of their teacher, the children of the The People not only picked up their feet, but suddenly they walked in the air, they flew! They found a way, even fleetingly, to free themselves up to be true to who they really were, and fly! I had had vivid dreams like that. I wanted that more fiercely than I had ever wanted anything ever. I even believed for years that I could do that--fly--or had done that, somehow, somewhere, and wanted it back, that ability. With an alcoholic father, my parents having recently divorced, and all the other drama in my life up until then, I really connected with the "other"ness of The People. It was on this list that I finally discovered what that movie was, and the Henderson stories that inspired it. I wish I could find a copy of the movie - it was probably really bad, but, I was only seven or so. :-) What a great read the stories are! My oldest daughter's now read them all, and it's time to turn my boys onto them as well. Kathy Fowkes -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "robert lauer" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 16 Aug 2002 17:22:27 -0400 Kathy Grant asked for recommendations on books on early Church history for a Jewish friend who converted to Christianity. I highly recommend the books JEWS AND MORMONS published by Signature Books. It presents Momonism's unique doctrines regarding Jews, and the evolution of those doctrines from the publication of the Book of Mormon through the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants and the later teachings of Joseph Smith, Apostle Orson Hyde and Brigham Young. I shared parts of this book with an audience of several hundred Christians and Jews (including clergy, lay persons and congregants) at Virginia Wesleyan College in 1999. As a result, they became very interested in the history and doctrines of the Latter-day Saints--so much so that Virginia Wesleyan sponsored a panel discussion on Mormonism and a visit for non-members to a local ward. ROB. LAUER _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: OmahaMom@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 17 Aug 2002 08:35:21 EDT One that is always good for someone who is looking at the Church is LeGrand Richard's A Marvelous Work and a Wonder. It gives a good overview without being overwhelmingly deep into doctrine or particularly preachy. Karen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Nan McCulloch" Subject: [AML] Utah Historians Date: 16 Aug 2002 21:08:35 -0600 My son asked me a question that I can not answer. Can anyone on the = list help me out. He is reading Leonard J. Arrington's _Adventures of a = Church Historian_. Arrington cites significant Utah Historical writers, = even mentioning the Tanners, but makes no mention of Fawn Brody or Dale = Morgan. This is puzzling to both of us. Any ideas? Nan McCulloch -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: [AML] Orem Center Street Theatre Production Schedule Date: 17 Aug 2002 09:56:38 -0600 On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 03:14:20 -0400 lwilkins@fas.harvard.edu writes: > There's a good chance I'll be back in Utah before next August. > Perhaps if I knew more about the 'complete season' I'd be even > more incentivized...? You have other productions in the works, I > presume? Indeed we do. All kinds of fun stuff. Following is information about our season as it will appear in our brochure: My Turn On Earth In the twenty-five years since this modern Mormon classic was first produced, the world has grown up a bit And perhaps has developed a cynical view of the purpose for life. Let the five grown-up children in this musical remind you that God does have a glorious plan and that your turn on earth is an important part of it. book and lyrics by Carol Lynn Pearson music by Lex de Azevedo directed by J. Scott Bronson August 29--September 28 (Possibly extending 'til Oct. 5.) Joyful Noise At this time of year when we pay particular attention to the birth of the Messiah, it may be inspiring to learn the true story behind the birth of the oratorio that bears His name. Handel's Messiah grew out of the needs of several individuals whose lives were out of balance. Their needs for approbation, reconciliation, acceptance, healing and redemption combine to create a drama as stirring and moving as its subject matter. written by Tim Slover directed by Christopher Clark November 28--January 4 The Way We're Wired In Mormon culture there are three ways you can become a Single Adult: You were never married, you were widowed, or you were divorced. In other words, you're either a loser, a pity case or a failure. It has been said of this play that "[e]veryone ... who is thinking about trying to become a human being should see this extraordinary play about every six months." written and directed by Eric Samuelsen January 23--March 1 Stones Two plays that appear to tell two different stories. The first, Altars, based on the story of Abraham and Isaac, is an up-close look at the concept of sacrifice, both in the literal sense, and in the day-to-day giving up of one's self as a parent or family member. Tombs is a frank inquiry into the relationship between the Son of God and his mortal mother. In awarding the play its 2001 citation for best drama, the Association for Mormon Letters declared, "the similarities in the themes of faith and family reach across the years to bind the play[s] into one coherent story that is relevant today and will always be. Stones sets a new standard for Mormon drama." written and directed by J. Scott Bronson March 13--April 19 April 20--Special Easter Sunday fireside performance (free of charge) Wedlocked He just wants to go to a basketball game. (Well, it is his job after all.) She wants to revive the romance of their courtship and honeymoon. Together, with the help of an old movie and a bag of popcorn, they just might be able to get more than their hearts' desires. written and composed by Marvin Payne & Steven Kapp Perry directed by performed by Marvin & Laurie Payne For Summer 2003, our first annual Mormon Heritage Theatre Festival: Joseph and Emma book & lyrics by Thom Duncan music by Mark Gelter June 27, 1844: Joseph Smith's Last Day six short plays on a common theme written by six different playwrights: Eric Samuelsen Elizabeth Hansen etc. Hancock County by Tim Slover And in October we will host a frightening Halloween event that will likely be called Theatre of Terror or something like that. We will also have a few slots available here and there for student productions and readings and concerts and comedy performances and ... whatever someone wants to put in there that looks to us like it might be worthwhile to put before an audience. Thanks for your interest. J. Scott Bronson -- The Nauvoo Theatrical Society *********************************************************** "If I were placed on a cannibal island and given the task of civilizing its people, I would straightway build a theatre for the purpose." Brigham Young -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: [AML] YOUNG, _Heresies of Nature_ (Review) Date: 17 Aug 2002 21:25:35 -0700 Review ====== Title: Heresies of Nature Author: Margaret Blair Young Publisher: Signature Books Year Published: 2002 Number of Pages: 181 Binding: Quality Paperback ISBN: 1-56085-158-9 Price: $15.95 Reviewed by Jeffrey Needle I don't recall when a review has been this difficult to write. "Heresies of Nature" is the story of a family torn apart by the ravages of degenerative disease. Ben and Merry Morgan are a typical Utah Mormon couple, immersed in the life of the church and in the lives of their three children. And then Merry is diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Not knowing how extensive the degeneration will be, the Morgan family gathers around mom, loving, supportive, and ready to accept whatever comes. Nice picture. Nice people. Mom is lucky to be married to Ben, to have her family around her. Enter Cody. Cody meets Ben when he is out hiking. He suffers an injury, and Cody seems to know just what's needed to effect a healing. Impressed, Ben invites Cody to his home as a nurse for Merry, who by now is completely incapacitated, unable to speak or tend for herself. But the introduction of another female, an adult, into the Morgan household is not something the children are ready for. As Cody, a healer deeply influenced by Native American healing rituals, becomes more involved in the family and with Merry's care, she begins, in an odd way, to metamorphose into Merry herself. Through Cody's interaction with Merry, and her discovery of a diary Merry had kept as the disease progressed, Cody mystically enters into the mind of Merry. Cody has an ability to read the thoughts of others, to anticipate their feelings. It is this quality that made me dislike her immediately. I don't want anyone near me who is able to read my thoughts. Having been single all my life, perhaps I don't recognize the benefits of being completely exposed to another person. And here I stop my narrative, not wanting to spoil what follows. So why is this review so difficult? I know I'm not alone in having lived through the pain of a slow, difficult death of a parent. My own mother suffered from several degenerative diseases which, in the end, took her life, but not before much suffering. I could not help but empathize with the Morgan family. I knew, in real time, what they were experiencing. But beyond the question of human suffering, Young's book presents some unique challenges to the reader. It demands much, but the rewards are great. More than just a "family saga" (the term used on the back cover), "Heresies of Nature" is a deep and powerful exploration into the nature of suffering, life, existence itself. It asks, and only sometimes answers, some profound questions. Let's begin with the title: "Heresies of Nature." What exactly is "heresy"? We learn from studying the word "heretic" that it hearkens back to an old Greek word meaning "one who thinks." Not a pleasant thought, as we've been trained to think of heresy as *wrong* thinking. Instead, we equate "agency" with thinking and deciding. What an irony if "agency" and "heresy" emerged as vaguely synonymous! But even assuming Young intended the ordinary meaning of the word "heresy," we are no closer to understanding her intention. After all, if there be any standard that defines the orthodoxy/heresy continuum, there must be a canon that defines it. And nature has no canon. One need only consider the cause/effect teachings of Deuteronomy, then the deep questions of Job, to know that nature, and God, play by varying rules. That latter-day revelation returns to the deuteronomistic assumptions, while retaining the uncertainties of Job's world, takes nothing away from our uncertainties about nature and about God. How, then, can nature have "heresies"? I can only guess that, lacking empirical evidence to support our suppositions of obedience/blessing, we instead invent our own orthodoxies through our expectations. Married in the Temple; faithful tithe payers; observe the Word of Wisdom; raise righteous children. And so on, and so on. And then disaster hits, and we have no effective coping mechanisms, no way of approaching our situation in a way consistent with our belief. This is when belief must give way to deep faith, where superficial attachments must yield to spiritual possessions. And it is where we must confess our own inability to deal with tragedy, and the importance of leaning ever more on the Divine presence. Young's book, then, is a study in the angst of existence, the inevitability of suffering, and the promise of redemption. The key is not so much in our circumstances, as they emerge with or without our cooperation, but in how we view, and deal with, those circumstances. We all must draw from the deep well of grace if we are to emerge victorious from the miasma of life. "Heresies of Nature" also explores complex family relationships, where the needs of the one can supersede the desires of the many. Each of the players -- the parents, Cody, the children, the in-laws -- have their own unique place in the book, and Young defines the roles in a focused and believable way. Following a pattern she established in "Salvador," much of the energy of the book is reserved for the dialogues between key players, where parents and children and friends and in-laws work out their own salvations, with much fear and trembling. The discussion between Ben and his bishop, a long-time friend and missionary companion, is a powerful and effective exchange, exemplifying Young's astounding abilities as a writer and narrator. This book is a markedly different from the "Standing on the Promises" series. One reading these works would have a hard time believing that "Heresies of Nature" came from the pen of the same writer. But, in fact, Young has returned to a style, an intensity, she displayed in earlier works. This is a fine book, one that appeals on so many levels. Readers will welcome this addition to the body of Mormon literature. It deserves a good read. ----------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BroHam000@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 18 Aug 2002 12:12:13 EDT Ballard's Our Search for Happiness is a perfect beginning. Linda Hyde -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 19 Aug 2002 00:34:07 +0000 What Mormon play (by, for, or about Mormons) would you like to see produced? Thom Duncan and Scott Bronson's exciting new theater project brought this question to mind. It could be something you saw once, and are afraid will never be produced again, or maybe just one you have heard about. Feel free to name one, or suggest a whole season. Who knows, maybe Thom and Scott will take up your suggestions. Andrew Hall _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 19 Aug 2002 09:29:22 -0600 Nola Smith did a dissertation on Theatre in Nauvoo and the early church. She graduated with a PHD from BYU in 2001. It is on file in the BYU library. Hope this helps. Bill Brown ----- Original Message ----- > Please pardon my query, but while a lot is made of Brother Brigham's > emphasis on the importance of the theater to the early Saints, I have yet to > hear what plays were performed in those very early days to divert the Saints > after a hard day's labor of making the desert blossom as a rose. > > Any ideas? > > Any idea of resources that might contain a hint? -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: [AML] KALPAKIAN, _These Latter Days_ (Review) Date: 19 Aug 2002 11:31:23 -0400 AML Book Review: These Latter Days, a novel by Laura Kalpakian Times Books, 1985 Who is Laura Kalpakian? or Why We Need Gerald Lund The title of this book caught my eye because of its apparent Mormon connection. A quick perusal of the dust jacket confirmed that it was the story of a Mormon woman living at the turn of the last century. Checked it out and read it with varying reactions. Kalpakian has a mostly accurate grasp of the Mormon milieu. There were only a few places where she made substantive errors. The writing and pacing were good enough to keep me reading although in the early part of the book I kept thinking I had been suckered into a Harlequin-style romance. That feeling dissipated as the protagonist's journey became slightly more epic than being graphically raped by her new Mormon husband in her parent's Salt Lake City home. This is the first big clue that Kalpakian doesn't like us very much. The heroine of the book is Ruth Mason Douglass who was raised in SLC. She married some stranger who was her last hope of escaping spinsterhood and was taken to a dirt hovel in Idaho. Her husband becomes deranged and sets himself up as a new prophet. Ruth flees with her kids and settles in St. Elmo, California. That's the book in a nutshell. Kalpakian's command of description, dialog, and internal narrative are very good. An aspiring writer could have much worse role models. Her plot pacing is likewise sharp and well-ordered. If she falls flat, and I think she does, it is in the depth of her characters, especially the Mormons. 95% of her Mormon characters are either ranting lunatics or smug, self-righteous, holier-than-thous. The rest of her Mormons don't really have a testimony--they leave the church and its culture in acts of heroic self-liberation. The most engaging and three-dimensional character is a frontier medical doctor who is an avowed atheist and who in moments of great tenderness and compassion, entices Ruth to break many commandments. I decided to post this review because I think this novel represents an effort by a mainstream New York press to show an historically accurate picture of Mormonism, but the writer, and her characters, have no grasp of Mormon expressions of faith, hope, and charity. I checked the AML archives for any review of this book and found one--a rather positive report. This review suggested that Kalpakian refrains from Mormon-bashing. I find, however, that she engages in a sneakier, and far more corrosive poison. Kalpakian, who lives in Bellingham WA, is a fairly respected writer with a significant readership and this book will incline people who don't know any better, that we are not so much a peculiar people as a pustilent people. Which leads me to Gerald Lund. I still haven't read any of his books and don't know that I ever will. But by all reports, he does present a necessary balance to the equation of a good writer who portrays Mormons as bad--that is, a bad writer who portrays Mormons as good. Reviewed by Tony Markham -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lynette Jones Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 19 Aug 2002 09:57:15 -0600 Kathy Grant wrote: >Hi all, > >Yesterday a friend at work asked me to recommend to her some books (fiction >or nonfiction) on the restoration and growth of the early LDS church. She's >a wonderful, intelligent lady who converted from Christianity to Judaism some >years ago. (I was a little surprised at her specific request, but I'd also >been praying for opportunities to share the gospel, so this is interesting :) >) > >The Work and the Glory came to mind, but I haven't read it, and I've heard >both positive and negative comments about it. I also wondered about Margaret >Young's books (Standing on the Promises) and Winds of War. I'd be interested >in any comments on these books, as well as suggestions for other books. I'd >like to choose books that would make it more likely that she'd gain a >testimony, rather than less likely :) ) I would recommend "The Work and the Glory". I would not recommend "Standing on the Promises". I have not read "Winds of War". I would recommend the writings of John Pratt. The Work and the Glory was the brain child of a man who himself joined the church at an older age. Throughout the process he, Bro. Moe required the writer, Bro. ___ to write the work with Bro. Moe's nonmember children in mind. He wanted to share the gospel and the story of the restoration, as well as his own struggle to accept the restoration and develop his own testimony. On a more personal note, Bro. Moe was the patriarch of the Asheville North Carolina Stake where I spent my teenage years and my parents still live. When Bro. Moe was released from active duty, (once a patriarch, you retain that ordination), my father was called and ordained as the patriarch for the Asheville Stake. So, of course, my father was curious about Bro. Moe's story. After learning it in person, my father wrote it up for all his posterity. Basically, Bro. Moe had thought of writing a fiction novel, through which he wanted to help his adult children understand why he had joined the church. He wanted to communicate the drama of a conversion story while giving them the facts about the restoration. Unlike most historical novels, these books do not tell a story about historical figures. They, instead tell a dramatic story into which facts from history could be woven. This allows for tremendous integrity. I do not like to refer to "The Work and the Glory" series as "historical novels" because they are unlike that very despised genre which puts words, emotions, actions, and thoughts into historical characters so that the author can tell a story about the historical character who is the subject of the novel. There is tremendous integrity in the writing of "The Work and the Glory" when it comes to historical facts and teachings of the gospel. There is very little said and done which the author can not document and all of that is based on experiences which are recorded. I think that is why these books have been so successful on the LDS and Christian markets. Christian Markets? Well, I don't think they have been actively marketed outside of Deseret Book, which is too bad, but the author has several stories about good people finding the books by accident or through a friend. Most of those stories tell of the result for the reader as being a kinder attitude toward the church if not the more common one of a conversion story. After several failed attempts, Bro. Moe had a dream in which he found himself being scolded. The man addressing him asked why he had not yet started the process? Bro. Moe's response was that he knew very clearly what he wanted to do, but that he was not a good enough writer. His visitor responded that he did not have to be the writer, but that he was to find a writer. The process of finding the writer is detailed in the preface of the first few books. Bro. ___ had written a few thrilling action novels before this time. After reading the writings of several LDS authors, Bro. Moe approached Bro. ___ to do the work. The rest is detailed in the book prefaces. Bro. Moe had a lot of involvement in the creation of the series. He did not meddle in the writing, but kept his own vision clear and focused. A discrete reader, I think, might be able to see the lack of Bro. Moe's influence in last volume of "The Work and the Glory" and the new series Bro. ___ is writing now. I think a member will find it very powerful as a tool in sharing the history of the restoration. As to "Standing on the Promises", I think this is written more narrowly. Its purpose is to give the LDS people more factual knowledge of what happened in the lives of several different members of color. It does impose thoughts and feelings and words upon these people. There is much less historical fact to go on and the authors did not choose to create a fictional character to tell the story, so there is more assumption that must be made. I loved it from the viewpoint of someone who had made a personal investment in the subject. I do not think that "Standing on the Promises" is a place to start for a person not yet familiar with the gospel. I have not read "Winds of War" yet. I do think that a convert to Judaism would find the writings of John Pratt extremely enlightening. They have tremendous integrity because they are based on extensive mathematical research. Access is easiest through Meridian Magazine on the Web. http://www.ldsmag.com/sci_rel/index.html All of his published works, which are prolific, are available at http://www.johnpratt.com/ . That is where one can find the "Genealogy of Adam to the Twelve Tribes" and "Introduction to the Hebrew Calendar". That is the extent of my knowledge on this interesting subject. Lynette Jones -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: [AML] Availability of _Prodigal Journey_ Date: 19 Aug 2002 13:09:16 -0500 Hi everyone, I was just tootling around on the Web this morning and did an Internet search for my book--to see where it's listed. I found 20 copies available at the Salt Lake County Library system, with 2 of those checked out. There are 15 copies at our (Kansas City) Mid-Continent Public Library System also. I found it at our local branch on the shelves last week. That was fun. Of course, I'd rather it was checked out, but it was still fun. It's on sale at All-Mormon.com for $11.95. http://www.allmormon.com/store/product413.html This site says it's in association with The Iron Rod Bookstore, which is our local bookstore by me (Kansas City, Missouri), but although it's underlined, it's not a clickable link to that store. It's still offered at DB online, on sale for $10.48 "club price." http://deseretbook.com/store/product?product_id=100011074&sku=4066899 Out there it carries an "average 5-star review" out of 13 customer reviews, not too shabby. 12 of 13 readers loved it, apparently. Thank you, thank you. Thankfully (I think) it's currently out of stock at half.com, but since it shows up, does that mean someone has listed it there? Hm... it is also not listed on eBay. It's still at Latter-day Harvest, but says it's back-ordered 2-3 weeks, sale price $12.71. No reviews there. http://www.ldharvest.com/item.asp?itemid=8184 It's still at Amazon, on sale for DB's price of $10.47, also lists no reviews, and says it ships in 3-5 weeks. One private seller there has it new for $9.99 (in TX), and another copy is listed used for $7.99 (in WA). http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1929281056/qid%3D1002646480/sr%3D1-9/ref%3Dsr%5F1%5F2%5F9/102-4552886-7330553 I didn't find any reviews other than those listed on the AML-List website that came through the List, but they were among the top 10-15 entries, so that's good. My website also turned up too, in the top 5 of all the search engines I tried (Google, Alta Vista, Yahoo, Hot Bot). I discovered--not online, but through the mail--that Horizon is now advertising it through the mail in the DB Book Club green & white flyer, as theirs, for full price. I haven't confirmed whether they actually have possession yet, but I had heard the news they were going to acquire it. Well--I'm not feeling too hot today, so this gave me something to do. Not that anyone cares that much about this stuff... it was interesting to me, anyway. That's all I found that I wasn't aware of, or was double-checking. I'm trying to figure out what other PR I can do while I'm sitting at home! Does anyone have good author-marketing ideas, especially long-distance? Or have any of you had success marketing your LDS book(s) to a non-LDS audience? (Barnes & Noble, Borders, etc., outside the Wasatch Front) Thanks for listening to me babble, if you haven't deleted this already. Linda ================ Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] _The Other Side of Heaven_ (Review) Date: 19 Aug 2002 12:26:08 -0600 Other sources to verify Elder Groberg's experiences: _In the Eye of the Storm_, now retitled _The Other Side of Heaven_ Elder Groberg's talks. He has spoken about his rat-bitten feet in a talk called, "How beautiful are the Feet." Letters he actually wrote. Yep, his wife has their courtship letters, and the movie quotes some of them directly. His parents kept all the letters he wrote from Tonga, including the one referring to the gift of jam from an old man (not the other preacher) who wanted to save the missionaries' lives. Mitch Davis consolidated a few things and a few characters to streamline the script, but the basic incidents of the movie are true. And there are even more of them. I'd love to see Elder Groberg's second book, _In the Fire of Faith_ become a movie. It movingly recounts the birth of his first son, John Enoch, and his miraculous preservation. From all appearances, that baby should not have survived. He is now a successful, handsome businessman, happily married, father of two. The story of the Tongans' uniting in fasting and prayer and then informing Elder Groberg (then mission president) that the Lord had let them know the child would live is simply beautiful. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 19 Aug 2002 14:26:43 -0400 His recent words to the young women not only allow that a woman might have to work, but encouraged young women to gain and keep skills that would allow them to support themselves and a family if the need arose. The shining example of womanhood he held up to their notice was a nurse in the hospital. It was a major change from what I heard as from the church and prophet as I embarked on adult life. [Tracie] ----- Original Message ----- IOW, though still discouraged, it's more > acceptable for women to work outside the home than it has been in the past. > > Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Susan Malmrose" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 19 Aug 2002 11:39:16 -0700 The Outsiders *is* dated and phony and unreal. I think it's selling points are that it was written by a teenage girl, and it's about troubled teens who are misunderstood and disadvantaged/given the short end of the stick. It's got cheese galore (we gotta do it for Johnny!) but it's also got tragedy and redemption. Some of my favorite ingredients in a story. I think any musical is going to be scoffed at by teens. Probably why they enjoyed Rebel Without a Cause but not WWS. And James Dean has always been cool to every generation. (I doubt that'd be true if he hadn't died so young.) My kids aren't quite teens yet, but the oldest one may as well be. He won't read any books I suggest to him. (He's not much of a reader to begin with.) I happen to think we're pretty cool for parents--my husband surfs/rides bmx/skateboards/snowboards, and I'm really into the underground stoner rock scene. But I don't get today's teens at all. When me and my friends were getting pierced and tattooed, it was something you'd get beat up for. Nowadays the kids who would've beat you up for it are the ones doing it. How do teens rebel? Susan M -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 19 Aug 2002 12:52:42 -0600 Couple of things to Rob None other than Lowell Bennion pointed out that truth is the knowledge of things as they "were, as they are and as they are to come." Not THINGS as were, as they are and as they are to come. The knowledge of these things differs with different people, with the light they have been given, and their faith. Also what Rob has done, really demonstrates deconstrution at its finest. When one can look at the same passage of text and legitimately and carefull draw a multitude opposing interpretations, then one is in the territory of deconstruction. Let us remember that the scriptures DO tell us that there is an opposition IN all things, not necessarily between them. All things are a compound of opposiotions. This is what the postmodernist doesn't find troubling, modernists on the other hand hated this idea. Look to Eliot and the objective correlative. The postmodernist kind of likes the opposition and the play in language and perception and thinking. Derrida never said that there was no truth, only that humans are incapable of grasping it in its fullness and subtlety. God is the only one with perfect knowledge of anything, and he meters out parts of the truth through the Spirit -- only a few have gotten the lion's share: Moses, Christ, Enoch. I wouldn't want it, right now. I'd blow up or go crazy. -- Todd -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 19 Aug 2002 13:00:12 -0600 Thom Duncan wrote: > You would never have known it at the time. Some high-level Church leaders > were teaching that the Civil Rights movement was a Communist plot. I *really* don't want to risk a political discussion here, but I think it would be a little naive of us to accept that all aspects of the Civil Rights movement were morally superior to what had gone before. As with any social movement, a fair number of people attached themselves who were far less interested in general equality than they were in personal glory and the opportunity to accrete power to themselves. Historically, we know that some social movements in this country were supported by those who hoped those issues would destabilize social order and lead to political revolution. The fact that some who support an idea or a movement do so not out of concern for the issue, but in an effort to gain power or prestige (or even personal validation) has never been a good reason to reject the underlying question without further thought. But it's also incomplete to say that just because an idea is good that all of its supporters and institutional adherents must also be good, and that all the goals of those institutions or individuals are as noble as the issue that brought them together. In other words, parts of the Civil Rights movement may very well *have* been Communist (or other political) plots that had more to do with social unrest than righting a wrong and repairing a society, despite the overwhelming (and in my opinion righteous) effort to right a social wrong and repair a broken community. So I worry a little bit about arguing a person's overall moral goodness on the basis of their opinions on a particular issue. I think President Benson (who I take to be the Church leader you refer to who believed that the Civil Rights movement was a Communist plot) expressed a real concern about a potential social destabilization that seemed to be sought by the more violent and aggressive elements of the Civil Rights movement. If he erred in lumping the political opportunists in with the social progressives, I believe it was an error of emphasis and context, not of core goodness and hopeful intent. Outside his political duties he taught that we should love one another and do good for its own sake--good and noble desires in any context. One thing I fear is that well-spoken people will carefully lead the hearts of men away from Christ and his infinite atonement. As a result it would be easy for me to advocate restrictions on what can be said or written so as to reduce those peoples' power or influence. But in the end I believe that truth is learned by examining more viewpoints rather than fewer, so there would be no point in attempting to restrict discourse--an opinion of mine that's radically different today than it was fifteen years ago. In this case I *do* repent of the things I may have said or written before. So have others. I don't think it's particularly useful to throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need to reject that which is worthy of rejection, but be very careful about rejecting all those who speak that which we find objectionable. Because we all continue to learn and to change, day by day, and what we know as fact today may well be proven as folly tomorrow. Which is not to say that we shouldn't hold firm to our beliefs and best desires, but rather that we should also be willing to accept change--both in ourselves, and in others. FWIW. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] KALPAKIAN, _These Latter Days_ (Review) Date: 19 Aug 2002 12:56:11 -0600 Tony wrote: That feeling dissipated as the protagonist's journey became slightly more epic than being graphically raped by her new Mormon husband in her parent's Salt Lake City home. This is the first big clue that Kalpakian doesn't like us very much. Why is this a matter of "like?" Mormon men rape people. They're probably not really faithful, but it happens. We'd be fools to think otherwise. Why isn't the rape just a truthful representation of a single event? -- Todd -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 19 Aug 2002 13:20:11 -0600 Kathy Fowkes wrote: > There were not enough stories of the People written. NESFA Press put out a compilation of the People stories in an anthology called _Ingathering: The Complete People Stories of Zenna Henderson_ here a few years ago (ISBN: 0915368587; currently available at Amazon.com). They're artificially ordered into a mostly coherent narrative, but the individual stories are all there. > As a small child (I > have no idea how old but the movie came out in 1972 when I was seven) I saw > a little of a made-for-tv-movie of "The People" (That was its title, I > believe) before I was shooed off to bed and it haunted me all my life. If you never saw the whole film you're quite lucky. I have it on video and it was a dreadful piece that missed most of the hope and magical joy inherent in Henderson's stories and replaced it with a sort of generic horror/melodrama couched in a socially relevant package. It starred William Shatner; 'nuff said. If you want to watch it, I'd be happy to let you borrow it. Let me know. But you're right--her stories were wonderful, and spoke far more of Mormon experience and the sense of being a separated people than I think Zenna ever realized. Her remoteness of time and place actually make the stories reasonably timeless, and thus accessible to any reader. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Turk325@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 19 Aug 2002 15:57:46 EDT Kathy Grant wrote: >Hi all, > >Yesterday a friend at work asked me to recommend to her some books (fiction >or nonfiction) on the restoration and growth of the early LDS church. She's >a wonderful, intelligent lady who converted from Christianity to Judaism some >years ago. (I was a little surprised at her specific request, but I'd also >been praying for opportunities to share the gospel, so this is interesting :) >> My suggestion is Donna Hill's *Joseph Smith: The First Mormon* from Signature Books. It reads like a novel, but better. Lots of detail. Kurt Weiland. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 19 Aug 2002 14:04:32 -0600 > I don't > and won't buy the idea that the Holy Ghost's point of view is relative and > can be deconstructed. Given that position, how do you explain the very real situation where two people can differ as to what the Holy Ghost tells them? If the Holy Ghost isn't relative, we are forced to believe that the "other guy" is wrong, while we are right. In some things, such as morality, say, we can of course believe that the guy who says that the Holy Ghost told him that promiscuity is okay is up in the night, but can we take the same position if Brother A feels he should vote Democratic while Brother A feels inspired to vote the GOP. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] KALPAKIAN, _These Latter Days_ (Review) Date: 19 Aug 2002 13:11:33 -0700 Thanks for your review. I read this book some years ago. Which leads me to Gerald Lund. I still haven't read any of his books and don't >know that I ever will. But by all reports, he does present a necessary >balance >to the equation of a good writer who portrays Mormons as bad--that is, a bad >writer who portrays Mormons as good. > >Reviewed by Tony Markham > I did enjoy this last paragraph! Wonderful observation. Thanks for it. ---------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "gtaggart" Subject: [AML] _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 19 Aug 2002 14:12:23 -0700 I guess we=92ll have to wait for wide release=97August 30th=97but for = some reason, I=92m not too optimistic that Possession, directed and = co-written by a BYU grad and starring another BYU grad, will show up in a Utah County theater. =20 Greg Taggart -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Orem Center Street Theatre Production Schedule Date: 19 Aug 2002 14:48:53 -0600 ---Original Message From: J. Scott Bronson > > Indeed we do. All kinds of fun stuff. Following is > information about our season as it will appear in our brochure: How much are season tickets? -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 19 Aug 2002 15:05:36 -0600 > What Mormon play (by, for, or about Mormons) would you like to see produced? > "The Best Two Years of My Life," a musical comedy about missionary life. "Father, Mother, Mother, Mom," a musical about polygamy by Orson Scott Card and Robert Stoddard. "The Dance," a musical by Carol Lynne Pearson and J.A.C. Redford. "Fire in the Bones" by Tom Rogers "Digger" by Rob Laur "Survival of the Fittest," by me "Polyphony," by J. Scott Bronson (though I prefer its first title, "Heartlight") "Bash," by Neal LaBute "The Trial of Reed Smoot (?)" by Eric Samuelsen. --- Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steven Perry Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 19 Aug 2002 14:59:33 -0700 (PDT) On Sunday, Aug 18, 2002, at 05:34PM, Andrew Hall wrote: >What Mormon play (by, for, or about Mormons) would you like to see produced? Or, what event, small or large, in LDS history do you _wish_ you could see a play/movie about? :-) Steve -- skperry@mac.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: daryoung@juno.com Subject: Re:[AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 19 Aug 2002 22:32:47 GMT What Mormon play to I want to see produced? I loved Josh Brady's "Great Gardens!" and I hope to see it again someday. [Darlene Young] ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 19 Aug 2002 17:00:26 -0600 I like Todd's definition--but I think it doesn't explain why so many people are against postmodernism. Todd say that the gospel is very much like postmodernism, but the theory I learned claimed that it wasn't *human* processes or modes of understanding that were useless, but *any* process, including God's. Hence there is really no right or wrong, no ultimate truth, and so on. Ick. That hardly resembles the gospel or the idea that there is someone (God) who has the ultimate truth. Like I said, I prefer Todd's definition, if it's an accurate one. Frankly, I've been out of the academic scene too long to know. But I admit to being a bit on my guard when I hear the term, "postmodernism," because I wonder just how far the speaker is willing to go with the theory. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 19 Aug 2002 16:54:19 -0600 I disagree with Eric about youth not responding strongly to language and violence and so forth. At least in conservative areas like Utah, that is not the case. I know a lot of youth who would not get past page ten of Catcher because of the language. (Speaking of Cathcer, I think that book is a better read for an adult anyway; I don't think youth can really appreciate what it's about. Just me, I guess.) Anyway, my vote for a book to read aside from many of the other great ones already mentioned is _The Giver_ by Lois Lowry. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Carrie Pruett" Subject: [AML] interest Date: 19 Aug 2002 23:06:40 +0000 >Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 22:17:18 -0600 >From: "Jacob Proffitt" >Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty > >- ---Original Message From: Harlow Clark > > > >Or as Spencer W. Kimball put it "Those who >understand interest earn it, those who don't pay it." > >Jacob Proffitt Not sure what the original context was, but that strikes me as a little simplistic. If somebody's figured out a way for the average middle class person in this country to attend college and grad school and/or buy a home without going into debt, than I'm all ears. As for understanding and collecting interest, the middle step would be having something to lend/invest, which is hard to do without having anything to start out with - That said, I've been impressed by my Muslim friends who go to a good deal of trouble to avoid paying interest - often living in homes and driving cars that are well below what they could "afford" if they borrowed. I do have Muslim friends who received "gifts" from religious organizations to fund their education, with no official "interest" arrangement but with the understanding that they would pay back more than they took when their circumstances allowed them to afford it, a system that seems to work well within a fairly small and closeknit religious community. [Carrie Pruett] - Pictures of perfection, as you know, make me sick and wicked - Jane Austen _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 19 Aug 2002 18:40:25 -0600 ___ Todd ___ | In short, postmodernism is the realization that any claims that | human intellect or human processes or human modes of | understanding fail to grasp the fullness of things, and than | any person who claims to offer some all-inclusive theory or | approach or method is probably deluded. | ___ Robert ___ | What Todd Peterson has offered above is the classical | Christian "understanding" of things--which comes from the | traditonal orthdox interpretation of certain Biblical | passages. | | The LDS faith--being a rdaical departure from orthodoxy-- | states, in fact, just the opposite and therefore contradicts | Postmodernism as presented by Todd. | | "A man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge" taught | Joseph Smith, showing that knowledge of an existent was | indeed achievable. | | "Truth is a knowledge of things as they were, as they are | and as they are to come," states the Doctrine and Covenants. ___ Two critiques. The first of Todd, the second of Robert. First off traditional Christian views of knowledge always recognized that there wasn't some human way of knowing that could encompass truth. The very notion of "mystery" as it relates to knowledge in the mainstream Christian tradition shows this. I think most Christian theologians would recognize that some truths are transcendent. Now what postmodernism critiques is the view that knowledge is akin to something like words that can be known absolutely. In other words we recognize that there are statements made of words. However we also recognize that *any* sentence is ambiguous. There are numerous ways to read them and that formally there is no way to decide which is correct. Philosophers tried to escape this limit of language by an appeal to intents and the like. What postmodernism does is show that this attempt to fix the word is impossible. Having said that though what postmodernism does *not* do is deny truth or knowledge. Rather it suggests that the traditional view in western civilization of what truth and knowledge are more complex than it first appears. Often this is because to get a sentence with a single meaning it entails that it have a *fixed* *static* meaning. In other words truth is of static *things*. Contrast this with D&C 93. First off we don't have knowledge of truth where truth is a static thing. Rather truth is a knowing of things. Note how this reverses the traditional view of western literature. What then is knowledge in this verse? There are two choices. If, as in traditional literature, knowledge is a true belief, this means that it is a belief that is grounded by knowledge in something else. Yet that knowledge too is grounded in something else. We end up with a chain of things known that never ends. In the language of postmodernism this is typically called unlimited semiosis. There is no end to the *thing* that we know. Rather knowing is always in terms of other know*ing* and not a fixed, static thing known. The other way of reading D&C 93 is to say that knowledge here is knowing as a kind of familiar knowing between people. A knowing more in keeping with how Adam knew Eve. In other words truth is a kind of intimate relationship between the knower and the things known. Note how this also reverses the traditional way of looking at truth. For traditional literature truth is what is known and truth defines a relationship between a proposition and an external reality that is *fixed*. Here truth is the relationship between the knower and reality. In other words it isn't tied to propositions and traditional notions of truth. You'll find this way of viewing truth in postmodernism as well. For instance if I say I know an other person, I recognize that while I will always know that person what the person is I know always escapes my knowledge. Put a little simpler, while I may know things about the person, I never know the person fully. I never can have a set of statements that fully and utterly say everything that could be said about the person. Further I recognize that the person I know is a dynamic entity. What they are tomorrow isn't what they are now. My knowledge is not a static knowledge, but a dynamic one that is never fixed. (Something that D&C 93 emphasizes as well by emphasizing a temporal aspect to truth -- something very different than what we find in traditional accounts of knowledge) Now I don't deny that there aren't other ways to read D&C 93. However most of them just assume that this reversal between truth and knowledge was an accidental figure of speech on Joseph's part. That what the meaning is ought to be something like "truth is propositions about things past, present, and future, which can be known." Yet, I can't help but wonder that if Joseph meant that, why he didn't write it. As for the relationship between salvation and knowledge. If knowledge just is of things or worse yet static propositions, how on earth could that relate to salvation? Yet if truth is in terms of knowing things, the way we know people, then the answer becomes clear. We can only be saved with knowledge because salvation is becoming like God but God is in and through all things. In other words God relates to the entirety of creation. His knowing is a familiar knowledge, the way a father knows their children. We too must come to know all creation. One last word on a post that has run on too long. I think that if you look at this two views of truth that you'll see why Brigham said that God is eternally progressing in knowledge while Elder McConkie said God couldn't increase in knowledge. Brigham was speaking in terms of a postmodern meaning of knowledge while Elder McConkie was speaking in terms of the traditional sense of knowing and truth. As such Elder McConkie was completely correct. The point, however, is D&C 93 and this odd use of both knowing and truth that seems tied to the scriptural use. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] T3 Team Options OSC's _Lost Boys_ Date: 20 Aug 2002 10:14:08 -0500 Science Fiction News, 20 August 2002: T3 Team Options Boys Terminator 3 director Jonathan Mostow and producer Hal Lieberman have optioned the film rights to Orson Scott Card's supernatural thriller novel Lost Boys, Variety reported. Mostow/Lieberman has tapped Brian Carr to adapt the book for the screen and plans to produce the film through its deal with Universal, the trade paper reported. Lost Boys tells the story of a family relocating to a town plagued by a series of children's disappearances who discover the supernatural character of their new house, the trade paper reported. Mostow is currently directing Arnold Schwarzenegger in Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, which is headed to theaters in 2003. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: [AML] SORENSEN, _Where Nothing is Long Ago: Memories of a Mormon Childhood_ (Review) Date: 19 Aug 2002 18:03:01 -0700 AML Book Review: _Where Nothing is Long Ago: Memories of a Mormon Childhood_ (a collection of short stories) by Virginia Sorensen, foreword by Susan Elizabeth Howe Original printing date 1963 Harcourt Brace and World Reprinted 1998 by Signature Mormon Classics Paperback. 220 Pages. ISBN 1-56085-102-3 $12.95 Reviewed by Kim Madsen In third grade I discovered and was captivated by Sorensen's _Miracles on Maple Hill_. Years later I shared it with my own children. Imagine my delight and surprise to finally discover Virginia Sorensen's LDS roots and affinity for her culture of origin. She was raised in a partially active LDS home, in intensely active Utah rural areas: Provo, Manti and American Fork. Sorensen's lovingly remembered fictions of her childhood were like echoes of memories for me as well; I've heard my parents and grandparents reminisce about similar things over the years. She captures the entire range of LDS life, from extremely conservative Mormons to third generation converts who pick and choose which doctrines they will live. And each strata is painted with a gentle and loving hand--no castigations, no judgments. The people in her stories come to life in full dimensions more loveable for their foibles. The foreword, by Susan E. Howe gave me greater insight into Sorensen's life, writing, and her place among LDS literati. Howe reports that Eugene England called Virginia Sorensen the mother of the LDS personal essay. That seems to have irritated her some; she energetically maintained these short stories were fictional however freely laced with autobiographical details. Whatever. Whether the stories are essays or fictions, they weave a colorful fabric of life in early Utah, post-pioneer, but near enough to touch those roots. For someone like me, fifth generation from those stern loins, it was a glimpse into life for grandma and grandpa, great-grandma and grandpa too. For others it can't help but stir longings for slower-paced times in our America, much like Willa Cather's _My Antonia_ and Mildred Walker's _Winter Wheat_, but with a uniquely Mormon twist. Work may have been constant and non-stop for the adults in the early 1900's and the westward migration, but the children had long days of wading in ditches, eating peaches, preparing for community picnics and 4th of July celebrations. Sorensen paints an idyllic haze of protection and innocence around the children. When Sorensen writes in the story "First Love" of playing outside on summer nights--Hide and Seek, Run Sheep Run--I realized it was a tradition handed down to my own suburban Utah childhood in the 1960's. I did those things. I played those games. We had a gang that roamed the streets until 10 o'clock curfew each night, not looking for or causing trouble, but wrapped up in our own juvenile world of who loves or hates who for tonight. Reading Sorensen's story, I felt a powerful connection to my parents and grandparents who allowed that tradition to continue. Then, with a pang, I realized my own children (in the 80's and 90's) didn't enjoy that delicious scary freedom of dark streets, so different than in the day. What drove the children indoors? Parental fear of strangers and gangs? Too many programmed lessons and activities? I only have one 14 year old daughter left at home. I wonder if she'll play hide-and seek with me tonight? Sorensen writes even-handedly whether exploring spiritual experiences or questioning doubts, "apostate" grandparents who still bring joy and love, beloved pets or secret codes with best friends. The narrative voice is clear and child-like, immediate, yet imbued with the distance of age remembering when. It is filled with the wonder, confusion, and fear of a child noticing the nuances of the adult world. The book is a fast read--a summer afternoon spent with dear relations and friends. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 20 Aug 2002 08:16:59 -0700 > Um, at great risk of being called puffed up or holier-than-thou or some > other epithet, I _have_ heard God dictate quite clearly on occasion, > actually. But most of the time it is a feeling or confirmation or > what-have-you, accompanied by the witness of the Spirit. > > Therefore I believe it could go either way, whichever is appropriate for > the occasion. > > Linda Just to give a second witness to Linda's testimony, I've also heard God dictate very specific words, but *very* infrequently in the past. Usually it has been only a feeling of light or darkness, wrongness or rightness, peace or confusion. Usually it feels or I "see" light -- I guess that would be that second sight kind of thing as Paris talked about, but for me it's as much feeling light, as seeing light. I have yet to find words for it, except perhaps the phrase from the end of verse 10 of D&C 67 -- seeing with one's spiritual mind as opposed to the natural or carnal mind. My first experience with receiving revelation from the Spirit that I *knew* was revelation was my moment of conversion when I asked in my mind if the Book of Mormon was true as the missionaries were teaching me about it at the beginning of our first discussion, and in answer a pinpoint of light burst into existence in the void of my heart (I saw it in my mind as a great blackness, darker and emptier than space). That light grew until it filled my whole body. I felt it as warmth and joy and peace unmatched by anything in my experience until then, and saw it in my mind's eye as light filling me and pouring out of me. That light was accompanied by words to my mind. Five statements carried with an undeniable witness to my heart of their truth, but they were part impression and part specific words. God lives, Jesus Christ is the Son of God and everything the Bible says about him is true, He is my personal Savior, the Book of Mormon is also the word of God, and finally, listen to the missionaries here before you, you can trust everything they say because what they teach is of Me, it is true, and you have no need to fear or doubt their words to you. When I heard the words "God lives!" I heard them with such power I can still feel it to this day, more than 20 years later. With the words came the realization that he not only lived, but KNEW me, had been watching over me all this time, and would always be there for me. Before that for years I had questioned and agonized and shaken my fist at heaven because of the total lack of sure guidance in the world, and what I felt was abondonement by God -- if he ever had existed, I felt that he had turned his back on us down here. But that's how the whole 'light' and 'darkness' thing started for me -- it was my first lesson in how the Spirit 'feels' so it's become how I feel the Spirit most often. I can only think of one other time when I heard specific words, instead of just that impression that only certain words were able to express correctly, until this past year. But this year I've been trying something different, and specific words come more often than before. I've been trying to implement Elder Scott's advice about receiving promptings and impressions of the Spirit which he gave in a BYU devotional address from Jan 2001, which was published in the June 2002 Ensign. He said: "You can learn vitally important things by what you hear and see and especially by what you feel, as prompted by the Holy Ghost. Most individuals limit their learning primarily to what they hear or what they read. Be wise. Develop the skill of learning by what you see and particularly by what the Holy Ghost prompts you to feel. Consciously seek to learn by what you see and feel, and your capacity to do so will expand through consistent practice. Ask in faith for such help. Live to be worthy of it. Seek to recognize it. **Write down in a secure place the important things you learn from the Spirit. You will find that as you write down precious impressions, often more will come.** Also, the knowledge you gain will be available throughout your life. Always, day or night, wherever you are, whatever you are doing, seek to recognize and respond to the direction of the Spirit. Express gratitude for the help received and obey it. This practice will reinforce your capacity to learn by the Spirit. It will permit the Lord to guide your life and to enrich the use of every other capacity latent in your being." So I've been writing down the impressions that come, no matter how minor or small or quiet, and what Elder Scott promises is happening. My capacity to hear the Spirit has expanded and changed. Now I actually hear words sometimes, when during my first decade in the church I was lucky to recognize the impression of "yes" and "no". I don't think I'm "special" beyond how everyone is special as a son or daughter of God. I'm certainly not better than anyone, and I frequently feel worse! Like Linda, I was watching this thread, but afraid to reply, for fear of appearing puffed up or holier-than-thou. But now that Linda's spoken up, I wanted to second her witness that it is possible to hear words, as well as impressions. Why shouldn't it be possible? He is after all our Father. He *wants* to talk to us as clearly as possible, words, impressions, promptings, whatever works at the time. "The Lord deals with this people as a tender parent with a child, communicating light and intelligence and the knowledge of his ways as they can bear it." (_Teachings_, p. 305). "It is the first pinciple of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, for he was once a man like us. . . . " (_Teachings_ p. 345-346) Kathy Fowkes -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathrynlane@cs.com Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 20 Aug 2002 11:32:21 EDT A "classic" book may mean to some a work that remains relevant generation after generation but to most teens it means that it's assigned reading and thus something oppressive and hateful and often with good reason. I had a literature professor at UALR a couple of years ago who said that the reason high school students hated assigned reading (such as anything on the Advanced Placement reading list) was because teens didn't have enough life experience to make the literature meaningful. He claimed that the High School AP list had the dubious distinction of making more people avoid literature throughout their lives than any other single program. I was made a believer when last spring I spent countless agonizing hours helping my bright, virginal, 16 yr. old daughter wade through Tennessee Williams "punishment" plays for a term paper. There was no way she could really relate to Williams themes of suppressed homosexuality and rejection of religion. How did she get that topic? Her section chose last from a required list of authors and "all the good ones had been taken." Datedness (is that a real word)? may be because the literature was only relevant to a certain time or it was popular because it was controversial at point in time or our children (students) may just not have enough life experience to relate. I too have experienced what Eric seems to have gone through that when we recommend a book, play or movie it may be rejected just because the old foggy recommended it. When we recommend a wonderful piece of literature (and buy a good hardbound copy of it for their birthday) and they react with indifference or mirth it's hard on our egos but so is a lot of parenting. I think we have an obligation to our kids (and/or students, younger relatives, etc.) to sell the literature. Not everything we like will be liked by kids (look at this list - do we agree on book reviews)? but there is a lot that they can enjoy and love. We just need to find it and help them access it. I've found that the way to get kids to love Shakespeare is to take them to plays. Movie tie-ins of classics are wonderful. "Oh Brother" raised great interest in Homer among the teens in my circle both related and not. Victor Hugo really rocks when he's on stage. I've tried to read "Lord of the Rings" to my kids for years and all but given up when two years before the movie was released my older sons discovered the web site for the movie and suddenly requested copies of the books and have stolen my good copies a couple of times over. LOR was "cool" again but it wouldn't have survived if it wasn't good literature to start with. At least some kids do like books. I have noticed a strange phenomena in my life. I'm the Mom at football games, mutual functions and any other place who always has a book. I also have a living room with a 20 ft floor to ceiling bookcase that is overflowing (I'm promised another for my birthday) mostly with science fiction and young adult/children's books. Some high school boys who come to the house and see the books or see me at school or church with a book will ask me about what I'm reading or approach me about whether I think that a certain book is "good." Often I get quires about which AP books I would recommend. Yes, they are the "qeeky" boys but I do love them. I never have had a girl approach me in that way. Weird? As we talk about what books we would recommend to young people, delinquent or not, I often see a huge gender divide. Does anyone else see a difference in what boys like compared to what girls like? [Cathryn Lane] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 20 Aug 2002 11:06:20 -0600 At 12:34 AM 8/19/02 +0000, you wrote: >What Mormon play (by, for, or about Mormons) would you like to see produced? I was most impressed with Scott Bronson's play, Stones, which was actually two plays in one. I saw it in Springville, and thought then that it should have a much wider audience. barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] YOUNG, _Heresies of Nature_ (Review) Date: 20 Aug 2002 13:17:17 -0600 Thanks to Jeff for, of course, another superb review. I have nothing to = add to his insightful comments about Margaret's book, except this: she's = also written a wonderful play, Dear Stone, using these same characters and = situation. One of the most joyous experiences of my professional career = came when I had the blessing of being able to direct the premiere = production of this wonderful piece of theatre. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 20 Aug 2002 13:24:35 -0600 What play would we like to see at Thom and Scott's new place? Well, first and foremost on my list would be Margaret Young's Dear Stone. Of all the 70's Mormon musicals, the one I liked the best back in the day = was Marvin Payne and Guy Randle's musical, Sweet Redemption Music Company. = =20 Is it too tacky to put a plug in for my own play, Without Romance? Scott Card's Stone Tables. Julie Boxx Boyle's mid-80's comedies When the Bough Breaks and 'Til the = Fat Lady Sings still hold up pretty well. =20 I'd still like to direct Melissa Leilani Larson's play Wake Me When It's = Over. And a reasonably obscure play which I still have great fondness for, = Janice Thorne Dixon's Seven Trumpet Sounds. An extended treatment of the = parable of the wise and foolish virgins. =20 I've probably forgotten a bunch of terrific plays which I should have = mentioned. Forgive me; it's Ed Week, and I'm grumpy. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 20 Aug 2002 13:39:30 -0600 And I disagree with Lynnette on this issue. I would not recommend Work = and the Glory. I would absolutely recommend Standing on the Promises. I hadn't heard this story about Brother Moe and his relationship to Gerald = Lund. It's an interesting and inspiring story, and irrelevant to the = issue at hand. The Work and the Glory series aren't badly written, and = the research is fairly thorough. But they present such a sanitized and = corporate-historical picture of early Mormonism, they seem like special = pleading. One can never predict such things accurately, of course, but I = think it likely that a non-member would be far more likely to be skeptical = of our claims as a result of reading WATG than otherwise. While a = straightforward admission of our human flaws, as in Standing on our = Promises, gives Jane Manning James' and Elijah Abel's inspiring stories of = faith and conversion more credibility. =20 For inspirational-devotional reading, I'd recommend Chieko Okazaki's Being = Enough, or Gene England's Dialogues With Myself or Making Peace. Or good = biographies, including Gene's Brother Brigham or Sam Taylor's biography of = John Taylor. =20 Have 'em read the good stuff, is what I recommend. Have 'em read Levi = Peterson or Doug Thayer or Maureen Whipple or Margaret Young. =20 Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 20 Aug 2002 19:54:00 -0600 ___ Kathy ___ | Yesterday a friend at work asked me to recommend to her | some books (fiction or nonfiction) on the restoration | and growth of the early LDS church. ___ I think Arrington's _The Mormon Experience_ is the best introduction to Mormon history there is. It is a very well written overview of the whole shebang and is balanced and fair. It obviously doesn't go into the nitty gritty nor some of the more controversial aspects of history. But that's a good thing for an introduction in my opinion. I've given away many copies over the years. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] AML-List on Hiatus Date: 21 Aug 2002 18:09:10 -0500 Folks, Due to the moderator's vacation travel schedule, AML-List will be on hiatus the remainder of today (Wednesday, Aug. 21) and tomorrow (Aug. 22). I will start posting the backlog (already significant) on Friday, Aug. 23. Thanks for your patience. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] re: Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 21 Aug 2002 02:12:33 +0000 Here are the Mormon plays I'd personally most like to see. If I was actually making the program, I would do it a little different, get a few more crowd-pleasing choices in there. The Prophet. By James Arrington. The Trail of Dreams. By James Arrington, Steven Kapp Perry and Marvin Payne. It was produced quite a few times in the last few years, so it could wait, but I have never seen it. Blind Dates. By Adam Blackwell. BYU, 1995. About a date rape at BYU, it sounds interesting. Stones. By Scott Bronson. Something by Orson Scott Card. He wrote a lot of plays in the 1970s, I don't know which one would be good. Maybe Stone Tables or The Apostate. Matters of the Heart. By Thom Duncan. What Wondrous Things. By Robert Paxton. Comedy about Lehi's family. Men of God By Neil LaBute. Or one of his other early plays. My Turn on Earth by Carol Lynn Pearson. From seeing the video, it is by far my favorite of the 1970s Mormon musicals. Heubener. By Thomas Rogers. Emma By Eric Samuelsen, music by Murray Boren. Dissonant music style said to have put off audiences, sounds interesting. Gadiation. By Eric Samuelsen. (I've already seen Accomidations, which was wonderful, or I would list that too). Joyful Noise or Hancock County, by Tim Slover. Dear Stone by Margaret Blair Young. About the same time I sent out this poll, Scott listed the plays for the following season, and several of the ones I'd like to see were listed. The entire season sounds great, good luck guys. Andrew Hall _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 20 Aug 2002 20:17:05 -0600 The term postmodernism beings to mind Elvis impersonators. I wasn't too hot on Elvis, and Elvis impersonators are rediculous. Paris Anderson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: [AML] re: Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 20 Aug 2002 20:33:27 -0600 I forgot this: I would love to see a first-class professional production of I AM JANE. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 20 Aug 2002 21:12:27 -0600 At 02:12 PM 8/19/02 -0700, you wrote: >I guess we'l have to wait for wide release=97August 30th--but for some >reason, I'm not too optimistic that Possession, directed and co-written >by a BYU grad and starring another BYU grad, will show up in a Utah >County theater. A writer on one of my romance writers lists is a fan of Neil LaBute, and she is very excited about seeing this movie. She loved the book it's based on. I enjoyed the book for the most part, but I didn't quite understand the ending. Perhaps my brain rejected it because it was not unambigously happy! (Call me unsophisticated. I don't care.) barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 20 Aug 2002 22:08:14 -0700 Regarding Eric's question of kids thinking things are "uncool", dated, funny-- Eric's reported experience of kids being derisive of West Side Story has not been my experience. Same goes for The Outsiders and Catcher in the Rye, but I must admit to hanging out with unusual teens, I guess. Because my husband and I were very involved in theater all during my kids younger years, they (and the friends they acquired, which were usually based through theater) were exposed to A LOT of musicals, and learned to appreciate the cultural climate the works were originally created in and accepted them on those terms. They found the parallels with WSS and ROMEO AND JULIET to be fascinating. They thought the stories were moving, even if the settings were not "modern". But then all three of my kids and most of their friends were voracious readers, loving Jane Austen, gothic romances like FRANKENSTEIN, old movies, in fact most movies including musicals and bizarre modern movies like Christopher Guest's mockumentaries. (I still have a 14 year old, but the other two are 24 and 21). This broad exposure to stuff led to some uncomfortable moments along the way. I admit to feeling sheepish that my three year old quoted lines from Monty Python's THE HOLY GRAILLE at inappropriate times. Nothing like hearing your kid note that Sister So-and-So of the imposing bosom had "huge tracts of land" in sacrament meeting, and in a British accent no less. On the more normal side, they played lots of video games as well, particularly liking WWF and Soul Caliber, lots of sim computer games. So in many ways they were ordinary teens, but had a lot of exposure to theater, both musicals and stage plays, movies and all different types of literature. Maybe it's the breadth of stuff teens are familiar with that make them accepting of "dated" material. To me it's a sign of immaturity (what else should we expect from teens?)and the need for further education that makes someone "hoot" at West Side Story. In the meantime, maybe they should be exposed through film to "Clueless" first, then "Emma", then "Romeo and Juliet" (maybe the DiCapprio weird version) then West Side Story. Might make a great discussion of how artists through the ages have told and retold the same stories trying to make them accessible to different audiences. Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: OmahaMom@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 21 Aug 2002 01:25:33 EDT You know, when introducing a non-member to the gospel through books, it's probably more the Spirit whether a book takes or not. Bro. Lund has gotten letters from people who investigated & joined the Church after reading TW&TG. On the other hand, I picked up a book in the base library in FL and as a result, investigated & joined the Church. A few years later, I reread the thing, and couldn't figure out what had impressed me so much about it. It was not very well written, nor did it explain the gospel very well. Even as I was investigating I was picking up and reading some anti- stuff which was also in the library. The only thing that struck me about that was that it seemed like the author was trying too hard. Now admittedly, I was 18 at the time, and looking for the gospel, not trying to analyze literature. But what matters is what they're able to be receptive to at this time of their life. Perhaps, with all of the suggestions, the next thing is to make a couple choices & pray about whether they're the right ones for this investigator. Karen Tippets -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Julie Kirk Subject: [AML] Call for Artists Date: 20 Aug 2002 22:00:25 -0700 I had brought this up on the AML list a couple months ago, but am sending out a reminder for anyone interested in either participating in some way (as an artist or volunteer), or even in just coming out to the event to see the work. Festival di Ragazze, an Italian Street Painting festival, will be held in Provo over Labor Day weekend at The Shops at Riverwoods. There is a webpage up for Project Kids USA, which is the organization that proceeds from the festival benefit at http://www.projectkidsusa.org There is also a link on that page to the festival, though the webpage is barebones right now. You do not have to be a professional artist to participate, nor do you need to have street painted before. If you would like to either paint a square, or be a volunteer at the festival or for Project Kids, just go to the website where you will find the contact info. At this point there are maybe 15 professional street painters coming out from California to do paintings. There are 20 or 30 local artists participating in the festival and I know they are looking for more artists and volunteers. I'll be working on the main featured piece, a painting approximately 15x25', along with a few friends. The other California artists are all working on pieces anywhere from 8x12' to 12x12'. It's a pretty incredible sight, and well worth a visit. If you are interested in painting but are unsure what to do, there will be several workshops held prior to the event. This coming Friday evening in downtown Provo I'll be working on a small kids' oriented piece, where children help complete the border of the painting, and Saturday morning is the first workshop. anyhow, hopefully some of you willbe able to make it out or, even better, be a participant! there is more info on streetpainting in general at http://www.streetpainting.net if you are interested in the art. thanks! Julie -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "jana" Subject: [AML] Contacting Reviews Editor Date: 20 Aug 2002 15:05:30 -0700 Hi folks: I'm moving on Friday, and while that shouldn't be of concern to most of you, I just wanted to put the word out in case I am hard to get hold if for a little while. Also, if you've been slated to review a book but haven't received your copy in the mail, please drop me a line. If you need my new mailing address (e.g. to send me a review copy of your latest novel), please email me privately and I will send it to you. Thanks! Jana Remy AML-List Review Editor www.enivri.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: Re: [AML] _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 21 Aug 2002 01:48:17 -0400 (EDT) Greg Taggart: > I guess we=92ll have to wait for wide release=97August 30th=97but for > = > some > reason, I=92m not too optimistic that Possession, directed and = > co-written > by a BYU grad and starring another BYU grad, will show up in a Utah > County theater. > (Speaking as a film critic.) So far, we can't get the distributor to give us even a hint of when the film will play ANYWHERE in Utah. The Aug. 30 "wide release" date really means "wider release"; it still won't be as generally available as, say, "Blue Crush." It makes no sense, given the local connection to "Possession," and if e-mails I've gotten are any indication, there's a fair amount of interest in it, too. But if it were up to me which movies played where, "Possession" would have opened here already, and "Serving Sara" would never open anywhere except in hell. Eric D. Snider -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] _The Poet and the Murderer_ on C-SPAN's "Booknotes" Date: 20 Aug 2002 18:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Brian Lamb interviewed Simon Worrall, author of "The Poet and the Murderer", on the popular C-SPAN program "Booknotes" on August 18. Here's the transcript: http://www.booknotes.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1689 "The Poet and The Murderer" is the most recent book on the Mark Hoffman case. And I believe it's the first book with substantial LDS themes to be featured on "Booknotes" (not the most felicitous choice, to be sure.) Worrall is a British, non-LDS journalist who became interested in the case because of Hoffman's skillful Emily Dickinson forgery. His book repeats the conventional wisdom of secular sophisticates: Joseph Smith was a con man, the Mormon church is a totalitarian organization not unlike the old Soviet Union, etc., etc. What is new and weird is Worrall's tone of almost hero-worship of Hoffman: he was a Promethean genius on the same level as Dickinson, a Professor Moriarty-Hannibal-Lecter-type figure who defied the oppressive Mormon/Utah power elite. (Instead of a sadistic little nerd-boy who took pleasure in tricking the people who trusted him, and finally committed two savage murders rather than face up to what he had done.) In the "Booknotes" interview Worrall sounds more conciliatory about the church, and says that he had to look at it "through Hoffman's eyes." It's a very well written book, with literary and cultural ambitions beyond the typical "true crime" opus. But on Mormonism, it's just sensational, and wrong. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Major Productions Subject: Re: [AML] Brigham's Theater Date: 21 Aug 2002 06:17:03 -0500 Thanks to Bill Brown, Richard Hopkins, Thom Duncan, Eric Samuelsen and R.W. Rasband for taking the time to point me in the right direction. As soon as I sent the query to the loop, a back hoe cut the cable that is my link to the Internet, so I have been sitting around for two weeks without access.... Robbin Major. Missouri City, TX -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "kumiko" Subject: [AML] Re: Box Office report - correction Date: 21 Aug 2002 05:26:34 -0500 Aaron Eckhart is listed by "Master of Disguise". That line shouldn't be there. He is only in "Possession." -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Snow Subject: [AML] Hymns Celebrating Polygamy--Update Date: 21 Aug 2002 06:37:09 -0700 (PDT) Years ago on this list I wrote an essay for my old AML-List column ("The Mormon Embrace of Pluralism (Wives that is)"--now in my _Curious Workmanship_ book) in which I asked whether in the days of yore Latter-day Saints sang hymns or otherwise expressed themselves artistically to promote polygamy. Here's an update. While attending the SLC Sunstone Symposium this month I inadvertantly came across such a hymn--"The Reformation" published in The Deseret News, vol VI, No. 38, Wed, 26 Nov. 1856. In fact we sang it at one of the plenary sessions. Here are some of the lyrics for your enjoyment from the handout we received--I have no reason to doubt the historicity of these lyrics, but someone can go check the source if it doesn't seem strident enough for you. 4th Verse: "We ought our Bishops to sustain, Their counsels to abide, And knock down every dwelling Where wicked folks reside: We ought our Teachers to respect, Not give them looks nor snubs; And keep our ditches free from pots, Likewise from stinking tubs." 5th Verse: "Now Sisters, list to what I say, With trials this world is rife, You can't expect to miss them all, Help husband get a wife! Now, this advice I freely give, If exalted you would be, Remember that your husband must Be blessed with more than thee. Then, O, let us say, God bless the wife that strives And aids her husband all she can T' obtain a dozen wives." Ed Snow ===== Read free excerpts from _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_, a Signature Books Bestseller at http://www.signaturebooks.com/bestsell.htm __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "kumiko" Subject: [AML] Box Office Report Aug. 16 Date: 21 Aug 2002 04:56:09 -0500 Feature Films by LDS/Mormon Filmmakers and Actors Weekend Box Office Report (U.S. Domestic Box Office Gross) Weekend of August 16, 2002 Report compiled by: LDSFilm.com [If table below doesn't line up properly, try looking at them with a mono-spaced font, such as Courier - Ed.] Natl Film Title Weekend Gross Rank LDS/Mormon Filmmaker/Actor Total Gross Theaters Days --- ----------------------------- ----------- ----- ---- 9 Master of Disguise 3,163,909 2,137 17 Perry Andelin Blake (director) 30,288,416 Aaron Eckhart (actor) 13 Possession 1,575,214 270 3 Neil LaBute (writer/director) 1,575,214 Aaron Eckhart (lead male actor) 17 Minority Report 564,101 506 59 Gerald Molen (producer) 129,115,416 38 The Divine Secrets of the 85,469 122 73 Ya-Ya Sisterhood 68,684,817 36 ESPN's Ultimate X 61,424 34 101 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 3,858,983 62 Cirque du Soleil: Journey of Man 28,114 8 836 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,792,792 68 China: The Panda Adventure 19,721 6 388 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 2,776,037 78 Galapagos 10,813 5 1025 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,626,159 87 Ziggy Stardust & Spiders from Mars 4,396 4 40 Mick Ronson (2nd billed actor) 70,199 106 The Other Side of Heaven 2,018 3 248 Mitch Davis (writer/director) 4,683,217 John H. Groberg (author/character) Gerald Molen, John Garbett (producers) 109 Mark Twain's America 3D 1,203 1 1508 Alan Williams (composer) 2,262,215 POSSESSION: BYU graduate Neil LaBute's fourth feature film "Possession" opened with impressive figures. The film came in at #13 for the weekend - apparently low for an opening weekend of a major film with a couple of well-known lead actors like Gwyneth Paltrow and LaBute's fellow BYU graduate Aaron Eckhart. But this was a limited release. A close look at the numbers shows that the film played in a mere 270 theaters - a very limited release for a major studio opening weekend - and based on its $5,834 gross income per theater, it appears quite likely that the film will more widely released very soon. For comparison, the blockbuster hit "Signs" which came in at the #2 slot for the weekend pulled in $5,790 per theater, but it played in 3,344 theaters. "Possession" ranked in the Top 10 movies this week for per-theater gross. COMING UP NEXT, the limited nationwide release of Latter-day Saint director Blair Treu's "Little Secrets" (previously titled "The Secret Keeper"). The family-friendly film that manages to entertain both children and adults actually had its official premiere last night (August 19th) at the Salt Lake Children's Film Festival. There have also been several preview screenings in various locations across the Wasatch Front, with response from those attending being very positive - including from LDSFilm.com co-webmaster Thomas C. Baggaley. The actual nationwide release date is this Friday, August 23rd. MASTER AT THE BOX OFFICE: Director Perry Andelin Blake feature film "Master of Disguise", starring Dana Carvey, reached a U.S. box office gross of over $30 million this week. This means that "Master of Disguise" passed Neil LaBute's "Nurse Betty" to become the top-grossing (at the box office) non-animated dramatic feature film directed by a Latter-day Saint ever (or at least as far as we have records for). ("Master" is still surpassed by 2 feature documentaries and 3 animated features.) In its third weekend of release, "Master of Disguise" ranked 9th at the box office nationwide. In related news, Roger Ebert reported in his "Movie Answer Man" column that the folks at RottenTomatoes.com told him "Master of Disguise" is the worst-reviewed film they have any record of. SPENCER CHRISTENSEN, Salt Lake City-based filmmaker and current University of Utah film student, has posted an impressive and highly energetic trailer for his upcoming short film "Nowhere to Run." Premise: A man is selected to win the Publisher's Clearinghouse Sweepstakes, but he is in the Witness Protection Program. Check it out: http://www.mecworks.com/~spencer/video/no_where.mov -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Amelia Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 21 Aug 2002 11:47:22 -0400 This is in reply to Scott Parkin's reply to Thom Duncan (sorry there was no way I could see to easily paraphrase): I don't think that what Thom was trying to assert was that everything about the civil rights movement was good. And while I do agree in principle with most of what Scott has said, I would caution everyone against deciding that just because there may have been people participating in the civil rights movement in order to gain certain political ends--whether they be communist or libertarian or whatever they were--does not mean that they were participating for the wrong reasons or that they had ulterior motives. It only means they had ulterior motives if (and only if) their objective was simply to wreak havoc on the world and society for the sake of wreaking havoc rather than in order to achieve what appeared to them to be a good. The argument that Scott put forward in the first part of his post reminded me (unpleasantly) of the old (maybe not old--it may still be in use) BYU American Heritage text book which posed the question (in a practice exam) "why did students protest against the Vietnam War?" and then out of several answers including that the students felt it was an imperialist war, that the students didn't want to lose their own lives, that the students were pacificists, etc., gave the answer "they were bored" as the correct answer. Now I hope desperately that it was a typo. But I fear that it was not. I fear that what happened there was a personal prejudice was used as a fact. Of course, they were simply young students, tired of studying and wanting to havea good time so they caused as much trouble as they could. How horrible to cheapen the convictions and efforts to make those convictions known by the protesters of that war. And to cheapen them only because the person who wrote the text disagreed personally. While we may disagree with a person or a group's motives for the political or social actions they take, we must at least recognize that such disagreement does not automatically mean that those we disagree with do not have a moral cause underlying their actions. And those who write history, whether it be through a fictional or a factual medium, have a moral obligation to at the very least acknowledge the complexities involved in any historical situation. So, regardless of who made the comment, condemning the civil rights movement as a "communist plot" seems to me a bit simplistic. And condemning something just because it *is* a communist plot is downright deplorable. condemning it because it's immoral or because the people leading the "plot" are only power-mongers is another story. But just because someone or something is communist or libertarian or liberal or conservative does not automatically brand it as good or bad--that cannot be done until we know the intentions underlying that person's actions. [Amelia Parkin] _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 21 Aug 2002 10:02:38 -0600 On Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:32:21 EDT, Cathrynlane@cs.com wrote: > As we talk about what books we would recommend to young people, = delinquent=20 >or not, I often see a huge gender divide. Does anyone else see a = difference=20 >in what boys like compared to what girls like? I started this discussion on another list I'm on, which is devoted to science fiction and fantasy (for all ages). The reason is that I've now = had three young men in my ward approach Jacob and me because they've started reading fantasy (usually _Lord of the Rings_ or the Harry Potter books) = and they don't know where to go next. (And their parents have no idea.) Despite years of reading the stuff, this question makes my mind go blank. So I took it to my friends on that list, hoping to generate some kind of permanent recommendation sheet. But I also wanted to know if they recommended different books for girls than for boys, or if there were any books they would *only* recommend for girls or boys. The membership of = this list includes a number of academics and several librarians, of ages = ranging from mid-teens to late-fifties. What I learned was surprising to me, since I had always heard that boys = will only read "boy" books and that girls will read either "boy" or "girl" = books. =46irst, there was no consensus on what a "boy" or a "girl" book was; = even the idea that boys wouldn't read a book with a strong romance element was = shot down by the men on the list, and a few of them admitted to having read a romance novel or two. Second, the men (whom I queried directly on this point) all said they'd never (as teens) felt put off by a book just = because it seemed girly. They didn't prefer action-adventure, thrillers, spy novels, or books with steely-eyed male protagonists. They just liked reading, and they liked books that interested them, whatever that meant. = I don't know how representative they are, as heavily self-selected as this list is, but their answers were not really what I expected even from = fanatic readers. The final thing all of them (male and female) insisted on was that the = best way to figure out what a teen will read is to know that teen well. This doesn't help me, and probably won't help Cathy, because it implies that there is no master list to consult when you're trying to get delinquents/cheerleaders/science wonks/insert category here to read something. Even kids who are "troubled teens" are troubled for so many different reasons that there's no one perfect book for all of them. But because there's no certainty, I think it's important not to rule out any book, even if we think boys (or girls) in general wouldn't like it, = because it's impossible to know that for sure. Melissa Proffitt =20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 21 Aug 2002 10:15:27 -0600 Okay, I'll add a voice here. Though I would love to see _Dear Stone_ performed again (with Scott Bronson as Ben), I already warned Thom that I don't think it would be an audience attractor. Sadly, neither would _Accommodations_--Eric's wonderful play. Both of these plays are hard ones, and the truth is, audience goers tend to want something like _My Turn on Earth_ for a date night. So I think Thom is right on in selecting that as the debut play. I think in time, when the theater is successful, he can do a more "risky" play--including his own excellent _Survival of the Fittest_. But to initiate a theater, I'd recommend light pieces + a little Shakespeare (which has no royalty and consistently attracts good audiences--including some high school kids who might get extra credit for seeing it.) Of course, the resident expert is my twin, Marilyn Brown, who can tell exactly what shows are successful. She and Bill have also done original scripts--which always bring in large contingents of the author's family and classmates! Anyway, you have to take into account not only audience sizes but costs of production. I have vivid memories of doing wonderful plays with Scott Card's troupe--which went bankrupt. By the way, _Dear Stone_ was written after _Heresies of Nature_ (Signature changed the title). I always enjoy Jeff's reviews, but I'm curious about one thing: Why is it so strange that I could write _Heresies of Nature_ and also _Standing on the Promises_? Don't most of us have a large spectrum of writing in which we work--at least potentially? Do we simply EXPECT a certain style or topic from some authors? Would people call for Gerald Lund's excommunication if he were to depict something really hard and bad in one of his books? Would people be terribly disappointed if Levi Peterson were to write something light? Or would they think he had run out of steam? The truth is, some of my best work is on my computer and I won't submit it anywhere--not under my real name, anyway. But to me, there is no conflict in the spectrum of what I write. It's all me. Maybe it's just that I'm a redhead and a gemini. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 21 Aug 2002 10:20:32 -0600 Interestingly, I don't think I'd recommend my own books for someone investigating the Church (though _House Without Walls_ would probably be really good for this Jewish man). If the investigator had specific questions about the Church and race issues, then Darius's and my trilogy would be appropriate. To be truthful, I don't think there's a piece of FICTION I'd recommend to introduce this particular man to Church history. I'd recommend the _FARMS_ book on Judaism and Mormonism. I'd recommend Nibley's _Lehi in the Desert_. I'd recommend Talmage's _Jesus the Christ_. Then I'd just recommennd the scriptures. That's the fundamental literature of our faith. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] YOUNG, _Heresies of Nature_ (Review) Date: 21 Aug 2002 09:33:35 -0700 What a wonderful experience this must have been! This fact is mentioned in the book. I can imagine how moving the play must have been. At 01:17 PM 8/20/2002 -0600, you wrote: >Thanks to Jeff for, of course, another superb review. I have nothing to >add to his insightful comments about Margaret's book, except this: she's >also written a wonderful play, Dear Stone, using these same characters and >situation. One of the most joyous experiences of my professional career >came when I had the blessing of being able to direct the premiere >production of this wonderful piece of theatre. > >Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 21 Aug 2002 10:37:32 -0600 (This post isn't really a reply to Jacob so much as a digression on one idea his post made me think of. Sort of a riff on an only semi-related issue that I've been chewing over in my own mind as I've been trying to figure out how to plot my Mormon utopic novel project. FWIW.) Jacob Proffitt wrote: > One of the greatest innovations of the 20th century is > non-humbling poverty. It used to be that the poor would become humble > in their affliction and experience a form of spiritual rebirth as a > result. That happens still, but I think a part of our current hardening > of hearts includes a certain pride and greed in poverty. To accompany > our pride and greed in wealth, of course. Each of us can only speak from our own experience, but I have never met someone who was proud in their poverty--which is not to say that they don't exist, but the fact remains that I can't find someone to point at and say "that one's proud of being poor." I do know a number of people who have become resigned to their poverty, and even a few who have found contentment despite their poverty. I know several who have lost hope because of their poverty, essentially losing the perspective to even see solutions to their problems despite their very real skills and potential. I know some people who are poor but too proud to ask for assistance. But I don't know anyone who takes pride in the fact of their poverty. For me greed is a different issue, especially when combined with fundamental laziness (my own greatest struggle). On a general basis, though, I can't help but wonder if we sometimes spend inordinate effort fighting the spectre of unrealized possibility more than the real problems that lie at our feet. If we spent less time worrying about fraud and devoted that time and effort to offering service, it seems like we could accomplish even more good than we already do--even if some undeserving benefit as a result. I wonder if we shouldn't just "serve 'em all and let God sort 'em out," as it were. I wonder if our fear of the elusive (illusive?) "welfare queen" has caused us to become so demanding, harsh, and critical of those who seek help that we all but criminalize them, and look for excuses to withdraw our assistance in the name of moral right. Are we letting the criminals dictate how we treat the honestly needy? Is that the best mindset to use when attempting to offer real charity? I know I've been very leery in my own giving over the years, and I'm not sure that my own fundamental mistrust is to my individual benefit. Especially as I've found myself on the receiving end a number of times recently. It's an emotional argument, but it's the one I keep coming back to. Isn't it to our good to help those in need of help--even if they have the tools to escape their poverty, and even if they're defrauding us by accepting our assistance? If we should labor all our days and save only one soul from poverty and the spiritual abyss it can represent, won't our joy be great in the kingdom of heaven? Of course we need to target our assistance to those who have real need so that needed resources are not wasted on those without need. But in attempting to make sure we only serve the truly needy I wonder if we don't do ourselves spiritual violence by looking at people as statistics, commodities, or subhuman, putting the mask of our own fear on them and turning them into targets or even enemies instead of fellow children of God. An emotional response rather than a rational one, but it's the hill I still struggle to climb despite recent experiences that should have taught me otherwise. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dallas Robbins Subject: RE: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 21 Aug 2002 09:44:29 -0700 (PDT) > ___ Kathy ___ > | Yesterday a friend at work asked me to recommend > to her > | some books (fiction or nonfiction) on the > restoration > | and growth of the early LDS church. To put my two cents in, I would recomment "Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism" by Richard Bushman. It focuses on the Smith family, first vision, coming forth of the BoM, and the founding of the church. Those interested in the early growth of the church, this book is a must. Dallas Robbins cloudhill@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 21 Aug 2002 11:03:36 -0600 > I don't think I'm "special" beyond how everyone is special as a son or > daughter of God. I'm certainly not better than anyone, and I frequently feel > worse! Like Linda, I was watching this thread, but afraid to reply, for fear > of appearing puffed up or holier-than-thou. The only way you would appear holier-than-thou would be if you were to imply that the only way to receive revelation from god was through words to the mind. You didn't do that. Instead, you delivered what I consider to be a marvelously simple testimony of how God speaks to you personally without suggesting that other ways are inferior. As one who has never heard a voice from Heaven (but who has had many impressions of the spirit) I appreciate that. Do you think that the way we each experience God colors our ways of writing about him? I submitted a manuscript to Granite Publihsers years ago which was rejected. The principle complaint was that the seventeen year-old main character seemed way too advanced in his thinking and knowledge about the Last Days to be believable. What concerned me was the youth in my novel was me. I had written about what I knew but it wasn't believed by the editor. I realize I wasn't typical of youth, but that was, after all, the point of the novel. (I've had others reading the ms. express concern because I have the Prophet as one one the three main characters and put thoughts in his mind and words in his mouth). As readers, and editors, perhaps we should not be so quick to condemn others' creative endeavors because they don't correspond to our experience. Kathy and Linda receive inspiration through words. Scott Bronson receives his most inspired thoughts in the shower. Mine come when I am usually thinking about something else altogether. Each of us would probably have different ways of describing an incidence of personal revelation. Each would be valid and could only be judged on how well it was portrayed literarily and not on how much it differed from our own experience. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "robert lauer" Subject: Re: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 21 Aug 2002 13:14:20 -0400 THOM DUNCAN wrote: > > I don't > > and won't buy the idea that the Holy Ghost's point of view is relative >and > > can be deconstructed. > >Given that position, how do you explain the very real situation where two >people can differ as to what the Holy Ghost tells them? If the Holy Ghost >isn't relative, we are forced to believe that the "other guy" is wrong, >while we are right. In some things, such as morality, say, we can of course >believe that the guy who says that the Holy Ghost told him that promiscuity >is okay is up in the night, but can we take the same position if Brother A >feels he should vote Democratic while Brother A feels inspired to vote the The difference between these two situations is that adultery is a moral issue while the party for which one votes MAY not be. ROB. LAUER _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Other Side of Heaven_ (Review) Date: 21 Aug 2002 12:47:53 -0600 I do have to respond briefly to this: >Mitch Davis consolidated a few things and a few characters to streamline = >the script, but the basic incidents of the movie are true. =20 Not so. Groberg did not sit on a spit of land by the ocean, reading the Bible in = Tongan and English in order to learn the language. He learned it the way = most people learn it, by listening carefully to native speakers, and = asking lots and lots of questions. Groberg also did not stand idly aside, = looking bummed, while a gang of pimps punched out the branch president. = He and the branch president visited all the families in the ward warning = them not to let their daughters go out to the yacht. Groberg did also get = discouraged and homesick and he did become quite depressed, and he did = recover. That story arc never made it onto the screen either. Mitch did = make some stuff up, very much to the detriment of the movie, which is a = real shame, because better writing would have resulted in a far better = movie. The book is excellent, in my opinion. The movie, not so much. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Cultural First Contact Date: 21 Aug 2002 12:42:43 -0600 I wonder if I could ask a favor of y'all. Does anyone on the list know of a good book introducing folks to Mormon = culture? I don't mean any kind of critical study; I mean something far = more basic, a good, well-written book that explains in clear language what = a 'stake center' is and why you can't get a good T-bone there, or what in = the name of heaven was happening in 'Relief Society' when they constantly = referred to a 'D & C.' A book, in other words, for new converts. Reason I ask, my sister-in-law joined the Church when she was fifteen, and = has now been a member for nigh on twenty five years. Two sisters joined = her, two did not, nor did her parents. But an aunt of hers, her mother's = younger sister, has suddenly begun taking the discussions, and is gung-ho. = She's met with the missionaries nine times in three weeks, has read the = Book of Mormon cover to cover, and, shocker of all, is really trying to = quit smoking. She went to church for the first time last Sunday (three = days ago), and was baffled by most of it, though certainly by no means put = off. And she's asked if anyone can recommend a book that would catch her = up on the terminology and customs. (She was particularly wondering why = our sacrament trays were so light. When the tray was handed to her, she = nearly pitched it over her shoulder, expecting one of those solid steel = Episcopal jobs. My brother had to explain that there was no theological = significance, far as he knew, to non-heavy sacrament trays.) I vaguely remember Kathryn Kidd did something like this, but I'm not sure. = Anyone have any better ideas? If such a book has been written, steer me = towards it. If no-one ever has written such a book, by golly, it's high = time someone did. Could be an invaluable missionary service, just to = clearly and concisely explain stuff the rest of us Church-broke types take = for granted. =20 Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "robert lauer" Subject: RE: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 21 Aug 2002 16:49:20 -0400 On "knowledge " and "truth" in relation to Postmodernism, Clark Goble wrote: > >First off traditional Christian views of knowledge always recognized that >there wasn't some human way of knowing that could encompass truth. The >very >notion of "mystery" as it relates to knowledge in the mainstream Christian >tradition shows this. I think most Christian theologians would recognize >that some truths are transcendent. > [snip from moderator] > >One last word on a post that has run on too long. I think that if you look >at this two views of truth that you'll see why Brigham said that God is >eternally progressing in knowledge while Elder McConkie said God couldn't >increase in knowledge. Brigham was speaking in terms of a postmodern >meaning of knowledge while Elder McConkie was speaking in terms of the >traditional sense of knowing and truth. As such Elder McConkie was >completely correct. The point, however, is D&C 93 and this odd use of both >knowing and truth that seems tied to the scriptural use. This discussion makes me think of that "loopy" old hymn,"If You Could Hie to Kolob." Notice that the first portion of the lyrics have to do with the eternal nature of matter. The writer takes the reader (singer) on a trip through space, pointing out of matter (organized and unorganized) extends eternally. The implication is that existence is material and separate from the mind that is trying to comprehend it. Because this is the nature of that which the mind seeks to comprehend, the quest for knowledge will be unending. No intelligence--not a man or a God--can ever know and understanding the TOTALITY of all things. The brilliance of this hymn is that it very simply shows the relationship of the mind to what exists, and presents this relationship as the foundation for morality and value. Thus the hymn ends with satements such as "there is no end to..." and presents a list of virtues. What is radical is that the hymn is not a hymn of praise to God, but a hymn of praise to existence; it is a hymn that enshrines THE PRIMACY OF EXISTENCE--the very concept that Postmodernism seems to reject in favor of THE PRIMACY OF CONSCIOUSNESS. When someone says, "Such and such in unknowable," or "no one can ever know or understand such and such," I have to ask: "How do YOU know this? In order for you to make such a statement about something, then YOU must understand it or comprehend; and that fact undermines your statement." Simply put, for me to honestly assert, "No one can ever understand God or know what He knows," I must understand God and know what He knows. Otherwise I have no basis for my assertion. Does any of this relate in any way to Postmodernism? I think it does, but you can be the judge. ROB. LAUER _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Catching Up (Moderator) Date: 23 Aug 2002 22:41:21 -0500 Folks, I'm getting a start now on getting us caught up, but there are still a lot of items in the bin. So with apologies, I'll be leaving out a few short, less on-topic posts that might in normal times go out. (I probably won't be consistent with this, but please bear with me.) If I don't send out a post of yours anytime in the next several days, and it's one you care greatly about, please email me again or query. Sometimes things do get lost, especially in switching from machine to machine as I'm doing right now... Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] Linda Adams Irreantum Interview Date: 21 Aug 2002 15:40:30 -0600 Hey, Irreantum magazine is working on an interview with Linda Adams, author of _Prodigal Journey_ as well as short fiction and poetry. Do any AML-Listers want to recommend interview questions we could ask Linda, whether general literary concerns or more focused on her particular work? If so, let 'em fly. Thanks. Chris Bigelow -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] T3 Team Options OSC's _Lost Boys_ Date: 21 Aug 2002 15:50:39 -0600 The problem with doing a film adaptation of _Lost Boys_ is that it is *so* similar in content to _Sixth Sense_. Plus we've had so many "me too" films of late. By the time it could come on the market I think it will be pass=E9= . My roommate and I were discussing this yesterday in fact. We seem to recall that Card himself said that it would never happen after _Sixth Sense_ came out. I wonder what changed his mind? (Well money, to some degree I'm sure. . .) -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cherry Silver" Subject: [AML] Call for Papers for AML Annual Meeting, February 22, 2003 Date: 21 Aug 2002 14:52:33 -0600 We invite individual papers, complete sessions, and panels for the next = AML Annual Conference in Salt Lake City, Saturday, February 22, 2003. = Topic ideas and bios should be sent by e-mail to cherry.silver@att.net. = Announced turn-in date is September 1, 2002. General theme is = "Directions in Mormon Letters: Voices and Vision for the Twenty-First = Century." =20 For twenty years AML has scheduled this morning and afternoon of = academic discussion to gather together people of like interests and = enhance our understanding of Mormon writing. AML will also present = awards for outstanding writing during 2002 at its luncheon business = meeting and then host an evening of readings from the award winners = along with a free buffet-supper. Please reserve the date. Subjects already submitted are ranging widely from murder mysteries to = prophetic passion, and from contemporary short stories to the challenges = of faith-based writing in-and-outside the Mormon tradition. Within such = broad categories as fiction, film, folklore, and fantasy, respondents = are proposing fascinatingly specific and stimulating topics. There is probably a place on the agenda for your favorite topic and your = critical thinking. We are scheduling medium and longer sessions, = allowing for two and for three papers a session to be followed by = comments and questions. Papers should be of a length to be read in = twenty-minutes. =20 AML reserves the right to publish your paper in its Annual Proceedings = and on its web page, but writers are invited to submit their papers = elsewhere as well. =20 Please write me your questions or suggestions as well as sending = proposals. Cherry Silver -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Postmodernism Date: 21 Aug 2002 16:08:17 -0600 ___ Annette ___ | I like Todd's definition--but I think it doesn't explain why | so many people are against postmodernism. ___ As with so many things it is typically misunderstanding. There was a great editorial on NPR Monday that was saying the same thing. It is quite difficult to find any postmodernist who actually fits what is claimed about postmodernism. Even postmodernists I dislike, such as Stanley Fish, don't really fit the attacks. (Although Fish is probably as close as you'll find a supporter of this "political postmodernism" that started this thread out) For those interested the following is a good set or resources on Fish. http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/kniemela/fish.htm Allow me a quote from Fish that might be relevant to the recent attacks on postmodernism. . . .in the Chicago Tribune, Julia Keller proclaimed "the end of postmodernism" on the reasoning that no postmodernist could possibly retain his or her views and acknowledge the reality of a plane hitting a tower. But no postmodernist would deny this or any other reality. What would be denied is the possibility of describing, and thereby evaluating, the event in a language that all reasonable observers would accept. That language, if it were available, would be hostage to no point of view and just report things as they are, and many postmodernists do hold that no such language will ever be found. also If by relativism one means a cast of mind that renders you unable to prefer your own convictions to those of your adversary, then relativism could hardly end because it never began. Our convictions are by definition preferred; that's what makes them our convictions. Relativizing them is neither an option nor a danger. But if by relativism one means the practice of putting yourself in your adversary's shoes, not in order to wear them as your own but in order to have some understanding (far short of approval) of why someone else might want to wear them, then relativism will not and should not end, because it is simply another name for serious thought. ___ Annette ___ | the theory I learned claimed that it wasn't *human* processes | or modes of understanding that were useless, but *any* process, | including God's. Hence there is really no right or wrong, no | ultimate truth, and so on. Ick. ___ I don't see how you move from the first bit, which seems right, to the latter bit of "no right, wrong or ultimate truth." It seems that most interesting postmodernism requires absolute truth but a truth that is transcendent of our ability to understand it. Yet that is a notion of truth far more in keeping with early religious notions of truth than modern notions of truth. It is a kind of humility. ___ | I don't and won't buy the idea that the Holy Ghost's point of | view is relative and can be deconstructed. | ___ Thom ___ | Given that position, how do you explain the very real situation | where two people can differ as to what the Holy Ghost tells | them? If the Holy Ghost isn't relative, we are forced to | believe that the "other guy" is wrong,while we are right. ___ You are conflating the point of view of the Holy Ghost with the point of view of the person listening to the Holy Ghost. Those hardly ought to be considered equivalent, should they? It seems the answer to your rhetorical question is obvious. People can misinterpret the Holy Ghost just as they can misinterpret any of their encounters with reality. -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "ROY SCHMIDT" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 22 Aug 2002 11:38:50 -0600 Did Signature publish this? I am pretty sure my copy is by Doubleday. But my copy is at home, so I am not sure. I believe Marvin Hill, Donna's brother, did the research, and would have written the text, but the publisher insisted on having coherent sentences . Roy Schmidt >>> Turk325@aol.com 08/19/02 01:57PM >>> Kathy Grant wrote: >Hi all, > >Yesterday a friend at work asked me to recommend to her some books (fiction >or nonfiction) on the restoration and growth of the early LDS church. She's >a wonderful, intelligent lady who converted from Christianity to Judaism some >years ago. (I was a little surprised at her specific request, but I'd also >been praying for opportunities to share the gospel, so this is interesting :) >> My suggestion is Donna Hill's *Joseph Smith: The First Mormon* from Signature Books. It reads like a novel, but better. Lots of detail. Kurt Weiland. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 22 Aug 2002 15:14:44 -0600 (MDT) Eric wrote: > Scott Card's Stone Tables. > My question is - would it be the older version done when he was on a mission, or the newer version on the Deseret Book CD? --ivan wolfe -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Democratization of Opinions (was: Postmodernism) Date: 23 Aug 2002 09:00:14 -0600 [MOD: I think Eric starts an interesting potential discussion here. How does this affect our rhetoric outside AML-List? How does it affect our culture? How does it affect our fiction? And is there, as Eric suggests, a particularly LDS dimension to this?] One thing we've seen a lot of on this list is what you might call a (guess = what) post-modern phenomenon I call the democratization of expertise. I = was thinking about this the other day when I had a very interesting = conversation with our esteemed moderator about Lord of the Rings, a work = he clearly has read very carefully and studied in great detail, and a work = which I read back in high school and kinda liked. Now, I'm qualified to = talk about the movie, because I know something (though not as much as some = people) about movies. But it's presumptuous of me to think that my = opinions regarding Lord of the Rings are as informed or thoughtful as = Jonathan's. It's a bit like foreign policy; I might think President Bush = is wrong about Iraq, but I must at least acknowledge that I don't get the = same intelligence briefings he gets. I think that this democratization of expertise may well be particularly = prevelant among Mormons, who have no professional clergy, no theological = seminaries or much in the way of theology, and who regularly are asked to = jump in and take on jobs that they are in no way qualified for. This = isn't a bad thing, of course; I think the track record of our lay ministry = is pretty impressive. But it's also not true that all callings are = equally well magnified, and it's likewise untrue that all opinions are = equally valid.=20 =20 Thus we see folks opining away about post-modernism who clearly haven't = studied it, but who know what they don't like. We have self-important = blowhards like that Samuelsen guy launching full-out assaults on Star Wars = films he hasn't studied, or opining away on economics when he can't = balance a checkbook. And I hope I don't offend anyone when I say that, = when it comes to racial issues in LDS history, Margaret Young's opinion is = in fact more informed than the views of the rest of us, and ought to be = given a bit more credence. =20 Of course, we all do this, take half-baked ideas out of our mental ovens = and immediately offer them to our guests. And in many respects, I'm a = post-modernist on this issue; I really do believe that expertise is often = overrated and that a healthy democratization of opinion can improve the = quality of discourse. I also think that 'expertise' can often become = 'loony obsession.' There's a bloke in my ward who can cite the official = findings of every UN commission ever formed. He may be the only person in = the world who reads those things. He studies the UN because he's sure the = UN's black helicopters are going to land, drop off an army of jackbooted = goons, take our guns away, and enslave us, and that right soon.=20 Still, there are people on this list who know more about children's = literature than I do, and I should listen to what they have to say. There = are people who know more about sci-fi/fantasy than I do; they're experts, = and I should respect their expertise. Maybe I can offer an alternative = perspective they haven't heard of on some issue relating to both their = field and mine. Most likely, though, my most brilliant insights into = their disciplines will be hackneyed and trite. So, don't automatically = defer to the opinions of 'experts,' but a touch of humility isn't a bad = thing either. Eric Samuelsen =20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 23 Aug 2002 11:29:13 -0600 Kim wrote: >Eric's reported experience of kids being derisive of West Side >Story has not been my experience. Same goes for The Outsiders and >Catcher in the Rye, but I must admit to hanging out with unusual >teens, I guess. Because my husband and I were very involved in >theater all during my kids younger years, they (and the friends >they acquired, which were usually based through theater) were >exposed to A LOT of musicals, Well, of course that's true of my own personal kids too, of course. And = they like Catcher in the Rye. Outsiders, not so much. No, I'm referring = to kids I teach. I teach a freshman course in drama, and that's the = context for my comments about WSS. A classroom full of LDS 18 year = olds,and they thought the movie was just soooo lame. Their loss, of = course. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kimheuston@aol.com Subject: [AML] YA Joseph Smith (was: Church History Recommendations) Date: 23 Aug 2002 14:13:22 EDT [MOD: I keep waiting for someone to mention _Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism_ by Richard Bushman. Beautifully researched and intelligently written in a way that is accessible to both scholars and Mormons. On a completely different level, _Believing Christ_ by Stephen Robinson. I'm changing the subject now. I wrote a YA bio of Joseph Smith a few years ago that no one wants to publish, which is fine since it won't make any money--it's a little too intellectual/objective for the Deseret Book crowd and a little too believing for skeptics. But I would have found it helpful as a kid and I hate to tuck it in a drawer. I've thought about posting it online. Any suggestions? Kimberley Heuston -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tait Family" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 23 Aug 2002 14:06:49 -0700 Last year I read "Latter Days: A Guided Tour through Six Billion Years of Mormonism" by Coke Newell (that title might not be exact--I've lent my copy out). It was published by a national press--St. Martin's, I think. It's a bit enthusiastic in parts, but it does a good job of introducing both Mormon history and theology, with some culture thrown in for good measure. I enjoyed it very much. Its intended audience is people like your friend. The tone is not overtly evangelical, just unapologetic in trying to explain who Mormons are and where we're coming from. Lisa Tait -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 23 Aug 2002 13:22:01 -0600 "Have 'em read the good stuff, is what I recommend. Have 'em read Levi Peterson" Once again I must respectfully disagree with Eric. If Kathy's intent is to inspire a non-member and possibly convert them, I would not recommend reading Levi Peterson. I haven't read much of his work, but I am finishing his short story collection, "Night Soil" as we speak. I can say that he is a very talented writer--however, his stories aren't exactly faith-promoting. This isn't a review, so I won't belabor the point too much, but suffice it to say that at least in this collection he got rather redundant--I could guess with pretty good accuracy which character/s would abandon their beliefs (granted, most didn't have strong beliefs to begin with), and it got tiring and predictable to read about their sexual transgressions. So while Lund's books aren't as well crafted literature as Levi Peterson's work, I'm willing to bet that more people have been attracted to the church from TWATG than from anything Peterson wrote. (And there is at least anecdotal evidence that Lund's books have led to some baptisms, assuming one can believe the back-liners.) Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] re: Sugar Beet Date: 23 Aug 2002 17:31:46 -0700 (PDT) http://www.thesugarbeet.com/intheworld/vindicates.html Lordy, that Amy Chamberlain is wicked *bad*. I look forward to her byline in every issue of "The Sugar Beet." ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] _Possession_ Reviews Date: 23 Aug 2002 18:54:48 -0700 (PDT) The early reviews of Neil Labute's "Possession" are coming in and they are, shall we say, mixed. Stephanie Zacharek of "Salon" is strongly positive, and specifically mentions LaBute's Mormonness: http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/review/2002/08/16/possesion/index.html Also positive is Roger Ebert: http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/wkp-news-possession16f.html David Edelstein of "Slate" is dismissive. He also mentions LaBute's Mormon identity, and he links to a Salt Lake "City Weekly" profile of the director from "his native Utah" (LaBute is from Indiana): http://slate.msn.com/?id=2069529 ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] Thomas S. KIMBALL, _Mormon Book Collecting Basics_ (Review) Date: 20 Aug 2002 17:51:58 -0700 Review ====== Title: Mormon Book Collecting Basics Author: Thomas S. Kimball Publisher: Thomas S. Kimball Year Published: 2002 Number of Pages: 44 Binding: Paperback ISBN: None given Price: None given Reviewed by Jeffrey Needle What? No ISBN? No price? What's happening? Tom Kimball, currently with Signature Books, has published a brief tome on the stated subject -- Mormon Book Collecting. He very kindly sent me a copy and invited comments, which I gladly share. First, the title might be a bit misleading. There really isn't much specifically Mormon about his book, despite the occasional mention of an LDS book as illustrative of his point. What he has given us here is a manual of terminology used by book manufacturers, sellers and collectors. And as such, it's a very welcome addition to my admittedly-limited store of knowledge. Kimball discusses such themes as bindings, dust jackets, the different parts of a book, and other ideas that will interest book lovers. He also gives us a nice glossary of book-related terms. I confess -- I learned a lot from this little book. What I wish he'd done was spent a lot more time, and added to the size of the book, by focusing more clearly on Mormon books. This is a vast field, one that frustrates many of us as we try to understand the field. The cover of his book is not helpful either -- six books stand side-by-side. Hugh Nibley's "Abraham in Egypt" stands directly alongside the collection "Four Faith Promoting Classics." Are they of equal value? I don't think so. And the presence of "Indian Depredations in Utah" by Gottfredson? On the same shelf with "Four Faith Promoting Classics?" Perhaps he was giving us a picture of the scope of Mormon book-collecting. I don't know. To his credit, I could find only a single typo -- page three has "thy" for "they." Blame the spell-checker. I'm going to hang on to this book, having full faith in my friend Tom that he will one day expand the book and make it a truly useful book on Mormon Book Collecting. ---------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Hymns Celebrating Polygamy--Update Date: 23 Aug 2002 20:10:32 -0700 Ed, just one correction to your post. You mention your "old" column. This should read, "Your old, much-missed, lamented column." What a treat it was to have them appear in our mailboxes. Do you think you'll ever pick it up again? [MOD: Amen!] Ed Snow wrote: > Years ago on this list I wrote an essay for my old AML-List column ("The > Mormon Embrace of Pluralism (Wives that is)"--now in my _Curious > Workmanship_ book) in which I asked whether in the days of yore Latter-day > Saints sang hymns or otherwise expressed themselves artistically to > promote polygamy. Here's an update. > -- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] Re: High School Literature Curriculum Date: 23 Aug 2002 23:10:01 -0500 Melissa Proffitt: ... I also wanted to know if they recommended different books for girls than for boys, or if there were any books they would *only* recommend for girls or boys. _______________ Is this where I would confess to having read almost all of the Nancy Drew series, and only one or two of the Hardy Boys books? Is it too late to repent? Would this require institutional repentance (i.e., talking to my bishop)? Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Hymns Celebrating Polygamy--Update Date: 23 Aug 2002 21:54:10 -0700 ROFLOL!! That is too funny. Please tell me this was a tongue-in-cheek poem published in the deseret news back then. Was it common practice in 1856 to circulate serious poetry and hymns through this medium that would have been sung in sacrament meeting or some other church meeting? Kathy Fowkes -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JLTyner Subject: Re: [AML] _The Other Side of Heaven_ (Review) Date: 23 Aug 2002 23:29:40 -0700 I have to agree with Eric on this. I understand the license many producers, directors and writers use in creating composite characters and combining events in the interest of time, etc. But this movie suffered from unecessary changes to the plotline that deviated too far from the book. The one that comes to mind for me is when in the movie Elder Groberg's mother tells him at the train station, "Whatever you do John, don't come home early." She did not say that to him from my reading of that event in the book. I don't know if she said it later, but I haven't found it yet if she did. Needless to say, I cried the rest of the movie, so did my husband. But that of course, was personal for me, but why have her say it in the first place unless she really did? I still enjoyed the movie, it was visually stunning, I thought the actors did well with the material they had, but they could have been given so much more. There was so much depth it could have had, especially had it relied more on the book itself. It should have been far more LDS than it was, including showing things likes blessings given and more of the doctrine and the why of it. It could have been that without being a proselytizing tool. It could have said some of who we are with no apologies, no defensiveness, just integrity and honesty. Imagine what could have been done with this vehicle had that been the case. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: OmahaMom@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations for Jewish Investigators Date: 24 Aug 2002 07:13:02 EDT I don't know if you can still get a copy, but Dr. Irving Cohen wrote a book many years ago called Jews of the Torah explaining the gospel in relationship to the Jewish faith. (His own family disowned him when he joined the Church.) Bro Cohen was in NY state when I got my copy from him, but since it was so many years ago--I don't know if it's possible to still get a copy or not. When one starts tuning in, there are many things in Judaism (Passover really comes to mind) that are like neon arrows pointing to Jesus Christ as the Promised Messiah, not to mention some of the things that happened in the restoration that relate to things going on at times of significance to Jews. No, I wasn't Jewish--but I almost was--but discovered the restored gospel before making the transition. Karen Tippets -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] KALPAKIAN, _These Latter Days_ (Review) Date: 24 Aug 2002 09:33:29 -0400 Todd Petersen wrote: > Tony wrote: > > That feeling dissipated as the protagonist's journey became slightly > more epic than being graphically raped > by her new Mormon husband in her parent's Salt Lake City home. This is > the first big clue that Kalpakian doesn't like us very much. > > Why is this a matter of "like?" Mormon men rape people. They're > probably not really faithful, but it happens. We'd be fools to think > otherwise. Why isn't the rape just a truthful representation of a single > event? It's a first impressions sort of thing that sets the tone for the rest of the book. I'd like to think that such behavior is the exception rather than the rule, but in this book, it becomes the rule rather than the exception. And is never balanced by what I would consider a positive LDS character. I think Kalpakian's unrelenting negativity towards Mormonism in this novel goes beyond "a truthful representation of a single event" and passes into bigotry and defamation. Tony Markham -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 24 Aug 2002 07:51:42 -0600 In response to my red-headed Gemini twin! (No, I have decided not to dye my hair red just yet, Margaret--maybe at 89 going on 90? OR, now that you are a grandma, you will just have to get gray?) I was quite interested to read your "added voice." And by the way, we have heard nothing but great comments about your I AM JANE, and we are still getting REQUESTS by the dozens that it should be done again! And I wanted to say that I have finished reading HERESIES and absolutely crumple (is that a word?) in obeisance to your writing ability! You are a master! And I was duly impressed, although it did quite hurt me to read about the father committing adultery. I have been struck down for putting a naked girl in GHOSTS OF THE OQUIRRHS and Deseret News refused to review either of my last two books--probably because of my indiscretion (?). So we are certainly siblings, my dear! However, I think you might be "up a tree" to call me the resident expert when it comes to plays, although you are right about Bill Brown, who picks 'em and writes 'em--although they are always fun light entertaining comedies. (He HAS had kudos and help from the experts like Tim Slover and Susan Howe, etc.) And his fun plays DO draw audiences. (Although there is some question--was it that last one that turned Eric Snider away from ever again sending anyone from the Herald to us for a review? It's too bad they can't have a pool of reviewers, one of whom would be willing to come south of Provo.) Bill's plays are fun--and I know I can't write comedy like he does. Although I do have a couple of musicals under my belt (MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM and MR. NUTCRACKER). So we are still struggling through. If it weren't for gracious donors, the Villa like most community theaters wouldn't exist. (Bill and I are spending our time naturally without pay--actually we are PAYING to spend our time, and I sewed from 8:00 in the morning until 11:00 at night for three weeks before PIRATES.) Actually, our present play, CURIOUS SAVAGE is wonderful. And the people are coming out of the woodwork so to speak, because our promo budget is so skinny. But you are SO right. We continue to get audiences (even little ones of ten and eleven people are WELCOME!) It's true we are not in the mainstream area like Thom and Scott's theatre. (And both Bill and I are thrilled to see Thom and Scott do what they are doing, and we wish them TOTAL success!) But the population down here is growing. And we have a fabulous children's program, so we're raising little theatre-goers. Did anyone besides us notice that Sundance died? What does that tell you? (I'm not sure.) Movies seem to be bigger than ever, however. And more power to wonders like Richard Dutcher and the OTHER SIDE OF HEAVEN people, etc. As for us and our little Villa house, we will just continue to plug along so we can practice our art. If the reviewers of literary novels and small theatre ignore us, we are still having our fun without them. And it is fun. I'm box office and concessions now and costumes and props (and resident laugher). And I feel cheery to greet the people. And many times our patrons leave the theatre wiping away tears--and also thanking us for what we're doing (and saying we're as good as the Hale, etc., which is always a coup!). They love it! So there is some reward! Which Thom and Scott will also discover and enjoy! Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] re: Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 24 Aug 2002 09:24:02 -0600 The whole cast would love to see this. We're planning on doing a show in June to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the priesthood revelation. If you have theater ability and can help us, please do! I guess we need money too, don't we. We may be performing at several locations--including (I hope) Thom's theater. Truth is, we need help! Please don't hesitate to offer your talents! Thom Duncan wrote: > I forgot this: > > I would love to see a first-class professional production of I AM JANE. > > Thom > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "robert lauer" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Poet and the Murderer_ on C-SPAN's "Booknotes" Date: 24 Aug 2002 11:36:46 -0400 I has the opportunity to read an advanced copy of "The Poet and the Murderer." I continue to be stunned by the factual errors in the research done by so many "good" writers. If memory serves me, the author presentation of the Temple ceremony was completely ridiculous. Since anyone can go on the net and find the transcript of the entire Endowment ceremony, I can only assume that Worrall decided that the facts regarding such things didn't suit the story he wanted to tell.That might be justifiable if "The Poet and the Murderer" was fictio, but it is supposed to be a non-fiction "True Crime" book. I am not one to label writers "anti-Mormon" just because they write critically about the Church or Mormon culture, but by any rational standard, Worrall's feelings toward the Church are clearly "anti." Give his disregard for facts, it is not at all surprising that he is symnpathetic to a murderer like Hoffman. ROB. LAUER -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "robert lauer" Subject: Re: [AML] _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 24 Aug 2002 11:42:08 -0400 Regarding the limited release of POSSESSION: The film has still not opened in most markets. For instance, the Tidewater/Hampton Roads area of Virginia is the nation 10th largest market and the film has not opened there yet. It is playing, for instance in Atlanta, Ga., but no where else in the state or in western Florida. Since the reviews of the film have been mixed to good, I don't understand the delay. ROB. LAUER -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathy Wilson Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 24 Aug 2002 13:03:13 -0600 Melissa Proffitt wrote: "Even kids who are "troubled teens" are troubled for so many different reasons that there's no one perfect book for all of them." And, as it turns out, this is what I'm observing. I have found all your recommendations helpful, however, especially for those books with themes about people who feel alienated in some way. And it's good to get a feel for what you have variously felt to be important for kids to have in their intellectual repertoire. My first week teaching at this detention center has been so positive. It's one of the few public ed jobs where the teacher doesn't have to be the "heavy." You get to simply teach and the staff takes care of discipline. Not to make any of you teachers jealous, but in addition, aides take care of attendance, grading and paperwork, so you really do get to just teach. Amazing experience. True, there are some kids there so spaced out that reaching them is an interesting challenge, but most of the time these are regular kids who made bad choices and got caught--lots of marijuana arrests, but I suspect there are plenty more kids using marijuana in our communities who simply don't get caught. About reading, I think my sweetest moment this week was when a 17-year-old boy brought in his favorite book, a murder mystery, hardback, his own personal copy, and asked if I'd enjoy reading it. He said he'd wait to talk about it till I was finished. :) :) :). Made me very happy. Cathy Wilson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 25 Aug 2002 00:27:44 -0600 Amelia Parkin wrote: > The argument that Scott put forward in the first part of his post reminded > me (unpleasantly) of the old (maybe not old--it may still be in use) BYU > American Heritage text book which posed the question (in a practice exam) > "why did students protest against the Vietnam War?" and then out of several > answers including that the students felt it was an imperialist war, that the > students didn't want to lose their own lives, that the students were > pacificists, etc., gave the answer "they were bored" as the correct answer. Just to reiterate the point I was trying to make in the Amelia is responding to, let me say that I agree whole-heartedly that what we need to do is think out our own positions and the rightness of the issues we choose to involve ourselves in and leave all the other stuff by the wayside. We are responsible for our own passions and actions, and what other people think and do is to some degree irrelevant--as are their reasons for it--in determining the honesty and goodness of our own efforts. And if we later decide we were wrong, we should admit our error and move on. What I was mainly trying to respond to was not whether every participant in the civil rights movement has (and had) pure intent, but rather to contest the idea that because an unnamed general authority once made statements to the effect that the civil rights movement was a communist plot (a belief I vehemently disagree with, btw) does not make that GA wrong in every other instance, nor does it condemn that GA's core morality, personal goodness, or general godliness. Similarly, it does not generally indict the leadership of the Church as racist or dismissive of the real struggles of a socially and legally oppressed underclass to be treated with both social and legal equality and dignity. The fact that it even *can* be argued that the GA was not fully wrong in his claim was intended to support the idea that we should reserve our judgment of other peoples' intentions or goodness and focus on our own. We have to work out for ourselves whether a thing is good or not and act on our understanding--even when powerful and trustworthy people seem to suggest otherwise. We should be as charitable as possible in viewing the motives of our brothers and sisters. I do believe that some peoples' motives are impure, and that some rode the civil rights issue for its political value, not its moral value. But that belief in no way suggests that I think the issue was corrupted by the hangers-on or the opportunists; far from it, I believe I characterized the movement as "the overwhelming (and in my opinion righteous) effort to right a social wrong and repair a broken community." I'm not entirely sure how that equates to an American Heritage textbook claiming that student protesters of the Vietnam war were just bored, because I don't believe I dismissed either the civil rights movement or the majority of its supporters as anything but a good thing (even those whose motives may not have been pure ended up helping to bring about an important social and legal transformation). If my previous post suggested otherwise, it was an error of communication on my part and I thank Amelia for challenging me, because that was absolutely *not* my intent. I just believe that in most social and political issues we are beholden to only two primary authorities--ourselves and our god. Everything else is just information to be weighed, tested, and used as best we can to aid us in making decisions about how and where we will spend our time, effort, and money. If our effort is spent tearing down those with opinions other than our own, I think we generally pursue a less fruitful path than if we spend our effort building up the things we believe to be good. Creative versus destructive. Making versus unmaking. For what it's worth. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Kimball" Subject: RE: [AML] T3 Team Options OSC's _Lost Boys_ Date: 26 Aug 2002 09:44:24 -0600 [MOD: Tom raises an interesting question. Other comments or reactions?] I normally lurk on the list but I’ve decided to comment on this thread. I don’t think Lost Boys would be a very good movie as I can’t imagine how this would translate to film. The power behind this books is it’s Mormonism. In fact I’ve never read a more Mormon book. I’ve had the opportunity to live in several places around the globe and it seemed to me that I knew people who matched all of these characters. I did my time in the South and remember how I was treated. Not just as a Mormon but as a Yankee. (From Utah, go figure) I finished the book on my way to work. The shuttle was filled with the military sort on our way to a government base in the middle of the outback. My son was only a few months old and I was a long way from my blue collar neighborhoods of West Valley. I was so moved by the book that I put my head to the glass and let the tears just stream, grateful for the morning darkness. I’ve never been that affected by a book before or since. I swore that I would stick to Machiavelli, Wilbur Smith, or my cold church histories. But I found my way back to Cards books. Scott’s books for me are like crack cocaine to the junky. If they took out the Mormonism from a film version it wouldn’t have the punch it needs and if they were to keep the Mormon angle it would not sell. A child hero who dies... Mormons couldn’t take it. This book has too much suffering for most Latter-day Saints today. Yet only a Mormon would get it. Tom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Hymns Celebrating Polygamy--Update Date: 26 Aug 2002 12:00:56 -0700 > "Now Sisters, list to what I say, > With trials this world is rife, > You can't expect to miss them all, > Help husband get a wife! > Now, this advice I freely give, > If exalted you would be, > Remember that your husband must > Be blessed with more than thee. > Then, O, let us say, > God bless the wife that strives > And aids her husband all she can > T' obtain a dozen wives." > > Ed Snow I read this to my husband Roger on Saturday morning and we cracked up over it. Today, after a semi-heated discussion with him (as in, it could have gotten *very* heated if we hadn't bitten our tongues a LOT and tread very, very carefully), Roger said to me, "you know.... I know now why that song from the pioneers spoke of the women having to help the men find 12 wives... after the 2nd one, the men gave up." Kathy Fowkes -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathrynlane@cs.com Subject: [AML] Mormon Theaters? (was: Mormon Plays) Date: 26 Aug 2002 15:05:36 EDT Maybe this isn't relevant to the subject but all these lists of "Mormon plays" made me realize that some members on the list live in a strange and unique part of the plant (Utah). The great majority of the Church lives outside of this rare world and does not nor never will have a chance to see or even hear about any of these productions. The last Mormon play I saw was the original production of Stone Tables at BYU. (Yes, it was the 70's.) Outside of "Zion" is anyone performing theater with Mormon themes? Cathryn Lane - Arkansas -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fred C Pinnegar Subject: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 26 Aug 2002 14:09:20 -0600 (MDT) [MOD: My apologies for truncating Fred's longer and more accurate subject line...] AML Friends: I just received word that my proposal to teach an honors course at BYU (Winter 2003), titled Poetry of the Restored Gospel, has been accepted. I have pasted in a copy of the proposal below, minus the names of the poets, and I would be interested in knowing your perceptions of major LDS poets as well as non-LDS poets who seem to speak directly to us. Suggestions for corse texts would also be helpful. For example, I have Parley P. Pratt on my list of LDS Poets; William Blake is an important non-LDS poet of the Restoration, and the England and Clark book, Harvest: Contemporary Mormon Poems, seems useful. What do you think? Thanks Fred Pinnegar Winter 2003 During the nineteenth-century, the word seer was synonymous with ?poet.? A seer was a person who saw things more clearly and deeply than other people and shared those truths with others in language designed to touch both the heart and mind. It is not meters, Emerson tells us, but rather ?meter-making arguments? which make poetry what it is. From our perspective as members of the Church, the Restoration is the central event of modern history, and therefore, it should also be the greatest source of poetic inspiration, the meter-making arguments described by Emerson. Proposed Course Description I would like to propose an honors course for winter semester 2003 (or fall of 2002) which would explore the poetry and poets of the Restoration. The course, open to undergraduates of all majors, would have several objectives: 1. provide students with a basic vocabulary for talking about the dynamics of poetic language. 2. introduce students to the major poets of the Restoration whose language compels our interest and attention to the good news of the gospel. Among LDS poets whose works we should know more intimately are 3. help students become familiar with important poems by certain non-LDS poets whose works might be described as pre-cursors to the Restoration. The poetry of ................. certainly resonates with themes and concepts familiar to LDS readers. Our hymn book also includes a great number of lyrics by poets who are not of our particular faith, such as Isaac Watts, but who seem to be speaking directly to us. 4. show students how the language of scripture opens up to us more fully as we come to understand the poetic nature of that language. A great deal of work in this regard has been done on the Old and New Testament which can be applied to Latter-day scripture. Texts Methods of Instruction The class will be conducted largely in a discussion format, varied by student presentations and guest speakers. The discussion format requires daily preparation and close engagement with the dynamics of the classroom. The course is geared for all students, regardless of major or discipline, and it is designed to enhance reading, analytical, discussion, writing, and presentation skills. There are many possibilities for guest speakers available locally, and I think it would be fun to hear them talk about the development of their work. If travel money is available, Karen Lynn Davidson and others out-of-state might be persuaded to visit Methods of Evaluation 40% Daily Work and Preparation. Students will need to be well-prepared so they will have something to say during discussions and be engaged in the dynamics of the classroom. This work includes short quizzes and commentaries, progress checks on papers, and other small assignments which will be used to check daily preparation and serve as a springboard into discussion. 15% Short midterm paper to analyze a short lyrical poem. The weight here is divided between a first and second version of the paper in which opportunity for revision and improvement is available. 35% Multigenre Term Paper on the life and major works of an important LDS poet. Again, credit is divided between a first version (5%) and a revised final version (30%). 5% Multigenre Oral Presentation to summarize the content of the term paper. 5% Final Exam -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Re: Cultural First Contact (Comp 1) Date: 26 Aug 2002 21:18:01 -0500 [MOD: This is a compilation post.] >From sammiejustesen@msn.com Fri Aug 23 21:48:21 2002 Finally, a question I can answer! Regarding a book introducing folks to Mormon culture, I highly recommend Clark and Kathryn Kidd's book "A Convert's Guide to Mormon Life." When I joined the church four years ago, this book proved an invaluable resource--especially when I was called as First Counselor in our ward Relief Society presidency after only four months in the church. I checked Amazon.com, and they have used copies available for under $5.00. Sammie L. Justesen sammie@doingitwrite.com >From bronsonjscott@juno.com Fri Aug 23 23:30:30 2002 Kathryn and her husband Clark. For Bookcraft I think. ""Mormonism for Dummies" was the title I think. Or, "A Field Guide of Mormonisms." Something along those lines. scott >From wwbrown@burgoyne.com Sat Aug 24 07:42:27 2002 Have her read the new novel that won the AML Unpublished novel prize of $1000 this year, MORMONVILLE by Deseret News writer Jeff Call. It is excellent and just got off the press. It's in the books stores as I speak! Marilyn Brown >From Chris.Bigelow@unicitynetwork.com Sat Aug 24 13:20:28 2002 The Kidd book, A Convert's Guide to Mormon Life, is much like what you describe in terms of scope, though I wouldn't call it concise. But it would probably fit your needs just fine. Chris Bigelow >From eric_eliason@byu.edu Mon Aug 26 10:09:45 2002 Eric, The book you are thinking of is: Clark L. Kidd & Kathryn H. : A Convert's Guide To Mormon Life. A Guidebook for New Memebers After some years in the Church she might get a kick out of Orson Scott Card's _Saintspeak_ which is a tongue-in-cheek "dictionary." Eric Eliason >From andrewrhall@hotmail.com Mon Aug 26 18:35:00 2002 Yep, Deseret Book published one by Kathryn and Clark Kidd a couple of years ago, called "A Convert's Guide to Mormon Life." I glanced at it once, it has both simple doctrine and cultural explanations. Sounds like what you are looking for. Deseret's web site says it is available at most stores. The blurb says: This remarkable book is certain to help converts and lifelong members rapidly gain a detailed understanding of the day-to-day life of a committed member of the Church. Written in a light conversational tone to facilitate easy reading and understanding, this remarkable book covers the gospel experience from A (Aaronic Priesthood) to Z (Zion) and tackles questions many may wonder about but be afraid to ask. Andrew Hall Fukuoka, Japan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: LDS Film Festival 2002 (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Deadline for LDS Film Festival Date: 27 Aug 2002 18:42:59 -0500 MAILBOX NEWSLETTER #4/2002 http://www.ldsbox.com feedback@ldsbox.com IN THIS ISSUE: 1. APPROACHING ENTRY DEADLINE FOR 2ND LDS FILM FESTIVAL 2002 2. LAST CHANCE TO ORGANIZE A SCREENING OF "BEST OF 2001" 3. WHAT FILMS ARE SHOWCASED AT THE LDS FILM FESTIVAL? 1. APPROACHING ENTRY DEADLINE FOR 2ND LDS FILM FESTIVAL 2002 If you want your film or screenplay showcased at the 2ND LDS FILM FESTIVAL 2002, you better hurry up! Send in your work no later than September 15. $ 2000.00 and the prestigious LIGHTBOX AWARD will be awarded to the best screenplays, films and videos. Everyone is invited to participate. We look forward to an exciting event! You can download the entry form at http://www.ldsbox.com/cgi-bin/entry.php For more info on the festival: http://www.ldsbox.com/cgi-bin/festival.php 2. LAST CHANCE TO ORGANIZE A SCREENING OF THE "BEST OF 2001" PROGRAM In the last two months, the "Best of 2001" program has been successfully screened in Italy, Oklahoma, and at the Salt Lake City Film Festival last weekend. The program is available for another month. If you are interested in organizing a screening, please contact us at info@ldsbox.com. You can also look up more information at: http://www.ldsbox.com/cgi-bin/tour.php 3. WHAT FILMS ARE SHOWCASED AT THE LDS FILM FESTIVAL? The LDS Film Festival showcases primarily works by young LDS filmmakers. The films and screenplays deal with a variety of themes and expressions. An LDS topic is not required. The goal of the festival is to celebrate artistic variety and give LDS filmmakers an opportunity to interact with audiences and other LDS filmmakers. For more information on the motto of the festival go to: http://www.ldsbox.com/cgi-bin/motto.php You either signed up for our newsletter or were recommended to us by a friend. If you would like to unsubscribe from future LDSBOX mailings, simply reply to this message with the word REMOVE in the subject line. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 26 Aug 2002 19:42:37 -0600 >. So while > Lund's books aren't as well crafted literature as Levi Peterson's work, I'm > willing to bet that more people have been attracted to the church from TWATG > than from anything Peterson wrote. (And there is at least anecdotal evidence > that Lund's books have led to some baptisms, assuming one can believe the > back-liners.) As long as those folks don't read any real Church history, their testimonies should remain unassailed. But what would we rather have, people who are converted to the Church the way it really is (Levi Peterson), or the way that Lund creates it? The problem with the latter is that you run the risk of your converts turning out like me -- frustrated and somewhat angry when they find out that Church leaders were much more human than they wsere initially portrayed to be, or that the Church has tried to re-write its official history. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] Re: Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) Date: 23 Aug 2002 22:52:33 -0500 I saw a play at BYU in January or February of 1970 about Korihor. I don't remember the details, and it may have been only one act, but it seems it might have lasted nearly an hour. Anyone know what it might have been and who wrote it? (And I wish I were close enough to the wild wild west to be able to see even a few of the wonderful plays that have been mentioned in the poll so far.) Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Programs for Poverty Date: 24 Aug 2002 00:30:50 -0600 ---Original Message From: Scott Parkin > > Jacob Proffitt wrote: > > > One of the greatest innovations of the 20th century is non-humbling > > poverty. It used to be that the poor would become humble in their > > affliction and experience a form of spiritual rebirth as a result. > > That happens still, but I think a part of our current hardening of > > hearts includes a certain pride and greed in poverty. To accompany > > our pride and greed in wealth, of course. > > Each of us can only speak from our own experience, but I have > never met someone who was proud in their poverty--which is > not to say that they don't exist, but the fact remains that I > can't find someone to point at and say "that one's proud of > being poor." I'd probably better expound on the point, then. I don't think any of us have seen anyone who will stand up and state proudly, "I'm glad I'm poor--I take pride every day that I am so poor." (though I've seen the occasional competitive poverty--we were so poor that...) But that's not really what I was saying. What I'm marking is the shift in attitude that has made poverty non-humbling. It isn't the pride that we see in accomplishment (that is problematic on its own), rather it is the pride that prevents acknowledgement of need or dependence on others. And I'm not saying that people should feel that they are weak or at fault just because they are poor, any more than I am saying that people should feel that they are above reproach just because they are rich. Feel bad for your weaknesses, feel good about your strengths, praise God for both and do as much as you can to provide the needs of your family. Whether you are rich or poor shouldn't play any role in any of that. A humble person will give graciously to others in their good fortune and receive thankfully from others when they are in need. It used to be that those who couldn't provide for themselves and families felt great humility in having to ask for sustenance from others. And they expressed thanks when those needs were met. Those humbled by asking for their needs learned to rely on God because they have learned that they cannot rely upon their own efforts. And even if they didn't become closer to God, they would become closer to those they relied upon, sometimes building important relationships that involved exchanges of love as well as goods and service. I realize that I'm talking in broad generalities, here. Certainly, individuals will react differently based on their own personalities, experiences, and choices even in like circumstances regardless of their historical era. Still, I believe that in the past, poverty could more easily result in a drawing together and that the humility could and did seep into other areas of their lives. These days, poverty is more and more divorced from humility and those who find themselves in need of things they cannot provide for themselves see no need to adopt any kind of ameliorating stance when approaching those they wish to supply their need. More and more, requests for food and shelter are delivered as demands and couched in terms of "rights". People have a "right" to good food and warm, safe shelter and when they find themselves in need they feel no compunction in demanding their rights be fulfilled. And, correspondingly, they feel little need to express thanks to those who provide them--after all, they are only supplying rights already our due. Because we don't want people who are poor to feel shame in their condition (a laudable goal for the most part, I admit), we've removed any hint of gratitude or the need to be thankful. Gratitude is gauche because it is somehow construed as an admission of guilt. So now, instead of gracious giving and gracious reception, we have graceless demands for unfilled rights and a begrudged giving or even a forced taking for purposes of fulfilling those rights. In getting rid of unwarranted shame, we've been hoodwinked into an accompanying lack of grace or humility. Shame and humility are *not* the same and our conflating the two is a sad foundation for our current hardening of hearts both giving and receiving. And I'll say here that this is something that is largely *not* found within the church. Our poor *are* more humble and our rich as well. One action of the gospel as a keen understanding of and preoccupation with pride and we (as a whole and not always in individual cases, mind) do pretty well when it comes to taking care of those in need. I think it is one place where we shine and are able to meet human needs in a way that is ennobling of both those who give and of those who receive. > On a general basis, though, I can't help but wonder if we > sometimes spend inordinate effort fighting the spectre of > unrealized possibility more than the real problems that lie > at our feet. If we spent less time worrying about fraud and > devoted that time and effort to offering service, it seems > like we could accomplish even more good than we already > do--even if some undeserving benefit as a result. I wonder if > we shouldn't just "serve 'em all and let God sort 'em out," > as it were. If resources were unlimited, I'd be happy with this as a policy. The problem is that fraud is incredibly crippling. Even if a very small portion of the population will engage in fraud (say 1 CEO in 100), the costs of that fraud will rise over time with no natural limiting factor. Fraud grows because greed has no bounds and systems open to fraud will attract those willing to defraud. Even a little fraud will grow over time as that little bit becomes normal and that next little bit more is sought. Allowed to grow unchecked, fraud will eventually destroy any system of distribution. That will continue to be the case until human nature changes. > I wonder if our fear of the elusive (illusive?) "welfare > queen" has caused us to become so demanding, harsh, and > critical of those who seek help that we all but criminalize > them, and look for excuses to withdraw our assistance in the > name of moral right. Are we letting the criminals dictate how > we treat the honestly needy? Is that the best mindset to use > when attempting to offer real charity? I *do* hesitate to give when my giving is demanded and even taken by force. I dislike it because without my willingness to give, there is no blessing in the giving. When there is contempt for my giving and open suspicion of my human value because I'm "rich", it gives me little joy or willingness to give. I *have* seen in vivid detail delivered to my living room those who *demand* food and shelter as their *right* as Americans and it leaves me cold. I've seen the reports detailing literally millions of dollars lost to fraud and I've seen the reports detailing the millions more lost to inefficiency and bureaucratic empire building. That's why I value the opportunity I have to give through the church and I value the experience gained in receiving assistance there as well. Fraud is enviably low there and bureaucratic overhead virtually non-existent. If I could, I'd divert all my aid to the poor through the church. I wish that were possible. > It's an emotional argument, but it's the one I keep coming > back to. Isn't it to our good to help those in need of > help--even if they have the tools to escape their poverty, > and even if they're defrauding us by accepting our > assistance? If we should labor all our days and save only one > soul from poverty and the spiritual abyss it can represent, > won't our joy be great in the kingdom of heaven? I don't believe so. Saving a soul from poverty isn't at all the same as saving a soul from sin. I don't give in to my daughter's demand to be carried everywhere we go, either. I make her walk. And I'm glad the bishop didn't carry me when I had great need, either. He made me walk it through and helped me as much as I needed help--and no more. It isn't for us to have every bump of life smoothed for us and every adversity swept from our path. Instead, it is important to be humble in giving, to learn discernment, to love others, and have generosity towards all. Wasting our resources on those who defraud is poor stewardship. Wise giving is as important as wise spending and anything less is an abdication of responsibility. Attitude is everything, though. Eliminating fraud by seeking understanding with a kind heart and generous spirit is a whole lot different from eliminating fraud by seeking conviction with a spirit of suspicion and assumed superiority. > Of course we need to target our assistance to those who have > real need so that needed resources are not wasted on those > without need. But in attempting to make sure we only serve > the truly needy I wonder if we don't do ourselves spiritual > violence by looking at people as statistics, commodities, or > subhuman, putting the mask of our own fear on them and > turning them into targets or even enemies instead of fellow > children of God. You certainly *can* do yourself spiritual harm by looking at people as statistics, commodities and so on. But making sure we serve the truly needy doesn't have anything to do with statistics or commodities. Serving the truly needy requires personal relationships, love, and caring. To me, that is the empowering difference between church giving and government giving. Government gives based on statistics. Anyone meeting certain statistical criteria qualifies regardless of situation or circumstance. There is no humanity there and no relationship or love no matter how complex and sophisticated you make the criteria. Church giving is based on personal evaluations and thorough knowledge of situations and circumstances. It's a weaker system insofar as it isn't subject to central oversight and is subject to the weaknesses of individual interpretation and so on. But it is also a stronger system because it gives wide access to a large pool of generosity and a human aspect in charity that permits kind giving and the expression of honest gratitude in receiving. We give central guidelines and dispersed discretion in application of those guidelines. You have to trust deeply to implement such a system and I find that faith touching--even ennobling. > An emotional response rather than a rational one, but it's > the hill I still struggle to climb despite recent experiences > that should have taught me otherwise. It's one I struggle with, too. Rational explanations are all well and good, but they don't really give much comfort when adversity strikes. It was disturbing to find that I wasn't humble enough to ask for help even when I desperately needed it. And that I had to seriously work on my gratitude as well. I thought I'd been raised better--turns out I'm not done growing up... Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "kumiko" Subject: [AML] Re: _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 26 Aug 2002 21:59:46 -0500 The release of "Possession" has always been planned as a "platform release" -- a very common distribution pattern, even for films released by major distribution companies or studios. Prints cost thousands of dollars each, and platform releases are one method to save on total print costs, as well as enhance box office in downstream markets as a result of previous positive reviews in the big markets and television shows. Lag time in bringing a film to a specific market does not signify that a movie hasn't gotten good reviews. Often it is the movies that distributors know will not be reviewed well that are better off being released simultaneously in as many markets as possible. I have no connection to the company distributing "Possession", but I believe the original decision to release it in limited markets at first, and as a platform release, was made not because they thought it was a "good" or "bad" film, but because they knew the subject matter was more cerebral, and based on a relatively highbrow book -- the movie isn't "blockbuster" or "popcorn crowd" material. As such, it was more likely to appeal to film critics than and attract an older, more serious-minded crows than, say, "Men in Black." Preston Hunter -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lynette Jones Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 26 Aug 2002 22:38:58 -0600 >Eric wrote: >And I disagree with Lynette on this issue. I would not recommend Work and >the Glory. I would absolutely recommend Standing on the Promises. Karen wrote: >You know, when introducing a non-member to the gospel through books, it's >probably more the Spirit whether a book takes or not. . . . >A few years later, I reread the >thing, and couldn't figure out what had impressed me so much about it. It >was not very well written, nor did it explain the gospel very well. >Margaret Young wrote: >....Then I'd just recommennd the scriptures. That's the fundamental >literature of our faith. I am grateful that Eric disagreed with me. It seems fair to say that Standing on the Promises is better written. However, Karen and Margaret have hit the nail on the head. Pray about it and use whatever the Lord makes available to you. (By the way, the second witness of the conversion stories from WATG came to my dad, Bob Collier from Bro. Moe). This has been a great discussion. I've created a long reading list. Thanks Lynette -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lynette Jones Subject: Re: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 26 Aug 2002 22:45:29 -0600 Fred wrote: >For example, I have Parley P. Pratt on my list of LDS Poets; William Blake >is an >important non-LDS poet of the Restoration, and the England and Clark book, >Harvest: Contemporary Mormon Poems, seems useful. What do you think? My only thought as a former BYU student who loved "Ma Bell's" poetry class on the writings of women is this: don't forget the simple. We sometimes get so caught up in the effort to prove that we are sophisticated and educated that we forget the simple joys. Kind of like the way we all love the simple pictures of Grandma Moses. Emma Lou Thayne comes to mind. I have not dug that book out for a while, and it seems that some of that is too bent on issues. However, there a few simple ones there that can be enjoyed for face value, left unspoiled by "archeological digs". Lynette -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] Hymns Celebrating Polygamy--Update Date: 26 Aug 2002 23:25:56 -0600 I know of three other hymns that deal with polygamy. The first two are by Joel H. Johnson, who is better known (and rightly so) for writing "High on a Mountain Top". Vain is the world's alluring smile, It never can my heart beguile; For all its glittering dust, to me, Is like the bubbles on the sea. To know my God, my soul aspires; To share his love, my heart desires; Yea, more than all earth's glittering toys, Her gold, her gems, and all her joys. Then, Father, let me share thy love; Send down thy Spirit from above; And give me wisdom, faith and light, To guide my wandering footsteps right. Oh! when my work on earth is done, May I be honored as thy son, Called home and crowned with endless lives, With glory and celestial wives. --------------------- O God of Zion, hear my cry, While I to thee in want draw nigh; I want from bondage to be free, The victor over sin to be. I want thy Spirit night and day, To guide me, lest my feet should stray; I want, through life's short day, to stand, Prepared to go at thy command. I want to dwell on Zion's hill Where thou to man mak'st known thy will; I want to share thy love and grace, With Priesthood pow'r to see thy face. I want my lamp with oil supplied, When Christ shall come to take his bride; I want to be his welcome guest, And in his house forever blest. I want my kingdom to increase, Nor through eternity to cease; I want the gift, celestial wives, Which brings the pow'r of endless lives. --------------------- B.H. Roberts wrote "Have Courage, My Girl, to Say Yes" while on a mission, between taking his second and third wives, and in counterpoint to the temperance hymn, "Have Courage, My Boy, to Say No". The dark clouds of hatred are gathering They menace the Saints with distress The nation in pride is forbidding The Saints to obey God's behest Will the daughters of Zion be fearing To choose for the right and for God? With fines and imprisonments threatening Will they cling to the sure "Iron Rod"? Chorus: Have courage my girl to say yes Have courage my girl to say yes If an Elder that's true Should come wooing to you Have courage my girl to say yes. Better marry a man who'll be constant Though of wives he may have more than you If he's faithful to God & his cov'nant Be assured he'll be faithful to you. Though of Babylon's proud wealth he can boast not Don't fear if his heart's only true The riches of earth can compare not With affection eternal for you. MBA -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Democratization of Opinions Date: 26 Aug 2002 23:54:27 -0600 Eric R. Samuelsen wrote: >>>I think that this democratization of expertise may well be particularly prevelant among Mormons, who have no professional clergy, no theological seminaries or much in the way of theology, and who regularly are asked to jump in and take on jobs that they are in no way qualified for. This isn't a bad thing, of course; I think the track record of our lay ministry is pretty impressive. But it's also not true that all callings are equally well magnified, and it's likewise untrue that all opinions are equally valid. <<< So what's the role of discussion lists like this one? I'm one of those people who's frequently guilty of expressing opinions that I'm not qualified to offer, but I do so at least partly to see how others will respond so I can learn more about an idea or issue. Is that an unfair use of the AML-List? As an adult who has no opportunity to go back to school and become educated to post-modernism, it's techniques, and uses, a list like this one proves to be one of the few opportunities I have to test out my understanding on a live audience. I know that I worry a lot about that. There was a time a few years back when more academic types participated more regularly on this list. I have to assume that unqualified, uneducated blowhards like me drove them off, and as a result it can be argued that total quality of discourse on the list has moved further and further away from that of a studied, qualified sharing of ideas to something more like an expanded testimony meeting full of nice people offering their thoughts, but with little actual ability to either shape or understand Mormon literature and culture. Interestingly, though we Mormons have a lay clergy and ask people regularly to become experts in areas where they have no prior experience, when it comes down to it the average Mormon requires authority before accepting most opinions. If a GA doesn't offer the spiritual advice we seem to mistrust it--especially if we perceive the person who offers spiritual advice as having lived a sometimes unspiritual life. We seem to require an official stamp of approval before we accept counsel. I know I'm guilty of that. I want the best possible understanding and tend to be more critical of opinions offered by non-experts. Yet even the uneducated have opinions and want to test them against those whose opinions are more considered. It's one of the reasons I like this list so much--the chance to learn more than I know and to hear thoughts that are not my own in a forum that can allow a college dropout like myself to converse with professors, selling authors, editors, and other people qualified to comment on literature. It's one of the many reasons I think the internet is at least as much a blessing as it is a trial. I admit that I would like to hear more from our qualified people on this list, though. How do we encourage that while still allowing each of us to exercise the right to express our unqualified opinions? Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 27 Aug 2002 00:19:44 -0600 ---Original Message From: Larry Jackson > > Melissa Proffitt: > > ... I also wanted to know if they recommended different > books for girls than for boys, or if there were any books > they would *only* recommend for girls or boys. > > _______________ > > Is this where I would confess to having read almost all > of the Nancy Drew series, and only one or two of the > Hardy Boys books? Is it too late to repent? Would > this require institutional repentance (i.e., talking to my > bishop)? I've already admitted to her that I read all the Trixie Belden books. I didn't like the Hardy Boys. Wasn't a big Nancy Drew fan either, but I thought they were better than the Hardy Boys. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] English Departments Etc. Date: 27 Aug 2002 00:07:06 -0700 On Tue, 6 Aug 2002 23:39:25 -0600 Mr. Mod writes [Attn Russ Asplund, bad pun alert, put down your diet Coke. Actually there's two potential bad puns here, I could rhyme Mod with Squad, or pair it with Archie and Edith Bunker]: > [MOD: (I note, with no disrespect intended, that neither > Clark nor Jacob has actually taught in a literature department, nor even I > think completed an advanced program.) Come on, all you List members > from English et al.; what think ye of all this?] I have done both, and I'll talk about my experiences in another post. I want to make a couple of other comments in this post. Clark Goble, on the same day as the pronouncement from the Mod Squad bunker said, > Read a lot of the feminist criticism, or New Criticism, or Mythic > Criticism. Most of it is facile, faddish and easy to "fake." The > problem isn't postmodernism (of whatever sense of the term). > The problem is that English departments tend to do poor > scholarship and that the departments are run according to > popularity contests. Before I counter this by pointing to the excellent, rigorous (two buzz words for the price of reading one sentence) scholarship of Richard Cracroft, Marden Clark, Bruce Jorgensen, Elouise Bell, Marilyn Arnold, or (where'd my mind go--I used to home teach her, was when she got fired and moved to Albuquerque, let's see, her husband makes seminary films and his name is like Sr. Benson's maiden name, uh, Amundsen, Mike Amundsen. Ah, there it is) Gail Houston, Joyce Nelson and many others, might I say I'm quite surprised no one in this thread has talked about the issue in terms of Hegel's dialectic, or of how that dialectic relates to Joseph Smith's letter from non-Liberty Jail where he reflects on how easy it is, once in power, to use power unrighteously, so easy you don't even have to have power, you just have to suppose you do. For me politicization in English departments started 100 years ago. the roots of the problem relate to the discussion we had of canon a couple of months ago. (No--it was back in February and March--must be all those Knights of the White Satin making time seem to stand right still.) Jacob Proffit said, 21 Feb., as part of that discussion ("Agendas in Lit Classes") "Further, survey courses should include the very best there is to offer in English literature for the topic of that survey course and should not be skewed to emphasize a particular sub-grouping." I said that if you want to teach literature, and look at all the questions the discipline entails, you can take any body of work, including LDS writers. Jacob replied that it would be a tragedy for an English major to graduate without having read T. S. Eliot, etc. Eliot's "Tradition and the Individual Talent," and his other writings about canon came out in about the 2nd generation of English departments, when departments were still debating and forming canon. I recommend Terry Eagleton's "The Rise of English," (Chapter 1 of Literary Theory: An Introduction) for its comments on Eliot and on how the canon was formed. As Jacob's quote above suggests, canon was formed as a way of excluding writing (the non-very best)--and therefore of exercising control over how and what people thought. In late Victorian England women were clamoring to get into universities and professors needed a curriculum that could both allow them in and keep them from gaining the power that inheres in knowledge. Eagleton says the academy did this in two ways, by teaching that literature was not about the lives we live (so Othello wasn't really about an abusive spouse-murderer--you have to dig deeper for the true meaning) but about more sublime truths, and by teaching that literature was in the past and that women writers weren't generally worthy of being in the canon. Both of these ideas have come down to us, that we don't yet know who the truly great writers of today are because you have to wait 50 years or so till after someone's death to see if they're still being read, still readable, and that canon is a means of exclusion. Indeed, the lack of LDS writers in the canon is one thing that makes My Name is Asher Lev a poignant novel for LDS writers, since Asher struggles with the lack of Jewish painters in the canon. Asher has no tradition he can model himself after so his Rebbe finally introduces him to a non-observant Jewish sculptor who can give him the guidance he needs. But not everyone is lucky enough to find a Jacob Khan. And if you're a brilliant writer or scholar, or just someone hungering and thirsting after writeousness, hungering and thirsting to see your culture represented in art, but worthy art is only about the past, never about you, how do you react? Now there's the Hegelian thesis: The people who set up English as a discipline set it up with a group of assumptions designed to hide the power of literature from the people who would be studying the discipline. What's the Hegelian antithesis? [Of coarse fool diss-closure re-choirs me to tell ewe I've never read Haygull and have Noah Deah what eye yam tocking about. I'm Ornery the eighth-eye-yam, Ornery the eighth-eye-yam eye-yam.] I suppose the antithesis is that the students in English departments study hard (For an affectionate look at the materials that came out of early canon formation read Helene Hanff's _Q's Legacy_ about her love of Arthur Quiller-Couch's books of essays. Hanff is the author of _84 Charring Crossroad_, about her transatlantic friendship with a London used book dealer.) and develop sophisticated complex tools to dismantle the assumptions that keep minority literatures minor. The clash between the new scholars and the older produces, finally, a synthesis, which becomes the new thesis, etc. Ok, I still haven't read Hey-girl-ye've-stole-my-hart, but I have read Joseph Smith's letter from Liberty jail (ever noticed how resonant titles like "Letter from [insert 3-syllable name here] Jail" are, and how much wisdumb such letters contain?) and it doesn't surprise me that the people who dismantle the older assumptions make a power grab. Power was very much on the minds of those who set up academic departments, and you can hardly go through the training offered in one without getting some sense of the power structures that be there. I said I'd write about my experiences in advanced programs and teaching in another post, but I will make one comment here. The clash between various schools of criticism is not the only one in English departments. There is also much tension between the critics and the writers--enough tension that though the Uof Warshington told us first group of MFAs that our degrees would be considered the same as MAs for purposes of getting into the PhD program, they reneged and made us (who wrote a thesis 3 times as long as the master's essay) write a 30 page master's essay as part of the application to the PhD program. (Can you say twisting in the wind?) One other comment. Clark Goble said > I love literature, but I honestly wonder how anyone could handle > making that their major. Which is a variation of a question that was > raised here a few months ago. How does Mormonism affect how > you read literature? I suppose this is just the question of whether > literature in academia conflicts with Mormonism. I know that > biology has traditionally got the big questions because of Evolution. > However it seems to me that English departments and perhaps > sociology are the ones with the biggest conflicts. A very good essay on this is Marden Clark's BYU College of Humanities Centennial lecture, "Art, Religion and Science: The Profounder Challenge" (in _Liberating Form_, but if you'd like to read just that essay drop me a note and I'll e-mail you a copy.) Boy that Art fellow sure shows up a lot of places in the humanities. Even shows up in discussions of Mormons and Masons, thanked repeatedly in footnotes for his insights Art DeHoyos is in Michael W. Homer's "'Similarity of Priesthood in Masonry': The Relationship between Freemasonry and Mormonism" (Dialogue, 27:3, Fall 1994, 1-113). Art even shows up in Lindon city council meetings, his son or brother, anyway, talking about fiberoptic Internet infrastructure, "I'm Ben DeHoyos and you're Harlow Clark, and your father is Marden Clark." Ok, enuff of this silliness. I need to get to bed and fill in the gaps I've left in it later. (I wrote that last sentence several days ago and filled in the gaps tonight, Aug. 26--but there is no end of gap filling. Hm. There is no end to a lot of things. Could make a catchy hymn. Harlow Clark aka Hollow Clock, incessant ticker until the former SS officer turned horologist said, "We have ways of making you tock." ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 00:31:54 -0600 >>> roy_schmidt@byu.edu 08/22/02 11:38AM >>> >Did Signature publish this? I am pretty sure my copy is by Doubleday. >But my copy is at home, so I am not sure. Doubleday published the first edition of Donna Hill's _Joseph Smith, the First Mormon_ in 1977. Signature Books republished it in paperback in 1998. It's still in print, and is a very well written biography. >I believe Marvin Hill, >Donna's brother, did the research, and would have written the text, >but the publisher insisted on having coherent sentences . I've heard versions of this rumor before, but I'm skeptical. Donna is amply qualified to have researched and written the book herself (she has a master's from Columbia University, was a professor at Hunter College, and published 10 other books, including an award-winning novel). Other church history recommendations: Avoid historical fiction, at least as a way to learn history. Read some biographies of people who weren't church presidents: Defender of the Faith: The B. H. Roberts Story, by Truman G. Madsen Orrin Porter Rockwell: Man of God/Son of Thunder, Harold Schindler Supporting Saints Life Stories of 19th Century Mormons, Donald Q. Cannon and David Whittaker MBA (Morgan B. Adair) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 06:12:58 -0600 I agree with Annette. (And sorry I haven't read yours yet, Annette, LOST WITHOUT YOU. It's one I definitely want to read!) The totally correct answer to the BIG QUESTION everyone is asking here is for an investigator to read Jeff Call's MORMONVILLE. We're getting some great REALLY Mormon "stuff" now that doesn't smack of irony or tongue in cheek "objectivism." If we can't see this development, we're high-hatting. Happy reading! Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 05:35:58 -0700 If you ever discover whether this book is still available, I would be very happy to know about it. Sounds like just the kind of thing I'd enjoy reading. Thanks. OmahaMom@aol.com wrote: > I don't know if you can still get a copy, but Dr. Irving Cohen wrote a book > many years ago called Jews of the Torah explaining the gospel in relationship > to the Jewish faith. (His own family disowned him when he joined the > Church.) Bro Cohen was in NY state when I got my copy from him, but since it > was so many years ago--I don't know if it's possible to still get a copy or > not. When one starts tuning in, there are many things in Judaism (Passover > really comes to mind) that are like neon arrows pointing to Jesus Christ as > the Promised Messiah, not to mention some of the things that happened in the > restoration that relate to things going on at times of significance to Jews. > > No, I wasn't Jewish--but I almost was--but discovered the restored gospel > before making the transition. > > Karen Tippets -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] _The Other Side of Heaven_ (Review) Date: 27 Aug 2002 08:59:15 -0600 I haven't thought of this line ("Whatever you do, don't come home early") from the perspectives of the Tyners. How awful it must've been to hear that! In all honesty, I cannot imagine my grandmother (Elder Groberg's mother) ever saying that. Ever. And, incidentally, the Grobergs did have a grandson who came home early from his mission with an anxiety disorder. I will admit that the situation was handled miserably. The way it was handled, sadly, resulted in the missionary's sister leaving the Church. As I understand it, she saw such a lack of compassion and love that she did not want to be involved in the relision (this is second-hand, so I can't be sure of its full accuracy) . So for me personally, though I would be stunned if my grandmother said that, the line comes down two generations with a lot of resonance. And what kind of an awful message is "Whatever you do, don't come home early" anyway? It could encourage a young man to ignore a serious illness-mental or physical. It could encourage him to cover a sin. Lousy line. [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 27 Aug 2002 10:03:39 -0600 You may want to check out Michael R. Colling's article "Pre-visions of the Restoration: The Poetry of Henry Vaughan" in _BYU Studies_ 22 (summer 1982): 279-88. Marny Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [AML] Hymns Celebrating Polygamy--Update Date: 27 Aug 2002 09:48:08 -0600 In the appendix to _Exemplary Elder: The Life and Missionary Diaries of Perrigrine Sessions, 1814-1893_ are a number of hymns Perrigrine had copied into his diary. One of our favorites at BYU Studies is "Fishing for Wives": Fishing for Wives The Fishing season now has come The streams begin to Eddy And every man that thinks he's some Must get his tackle ready But not for Salmon or for Trout To throw the net he strives Sir You'll wonder what for then no doubt Tis for some pretty Wives sir Chorus For which increase is the thing of late For which the folks are fishing But ladies don't catch at this Bate When they go out a-fishing Then friends just bear with me Nor deem me out of place ___ show you though of make you Wne (?) of our lace For (?) Some with silks and dresses These blessings would inherit Through fancy shawls they ______ And not by their own merit Chorus They want to swell their families Tis true upon my life sir No matter who or what it is So long as it's a wife sir For any thing with Petticots Some men are nearly raving And don't know what the Devil to do For some thing to be saving Chorus Some married women are hard (?) As any of the men sir For after he has fished for them They'll fish for him again sir Now this may seem a curious plan To some it is revolting Tis what do you think of my old man For now you need exalting Chorus And some who would a Kingdom get By Fishing or by Barter Oft take a soft fate (?) in their net And some times catch a tarter But if you act by better sense Nor ever take such rash courses T'will be a saving of expense And trouble and divorces Chorus Now if you'd gain on either side The blessings of perfection Just let your eyes be opened wide In making a selection Thus walk in wisdom's pleasant ways True happiness securing And peace will ever crown your days True happiness securing And Love be all enduring For increase is the thing of late For which the folks are fishing Then always do the thing that's _____ But don't go out a Fishing Marny Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Turk325@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 12:31:09 -0400 In a message dated Thu, 22 Aug 2002 12:38:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, roy_schmidt@byu.edu writes: > Did Signature publish this? I am pretty sure my copy is by > Doubleday. When I wrote the post, I had loaned someone my copy, so I went to barnesandnoble.com and looked it up. They list Signature Books as the publisher. That may be a second or third or [whatever] publishing. I have no idea who published my copy. I just thought it was a good account. Kurt Weiland -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Re: Cultural First Contact Date: 27 Aug 2002 10:34:02 -0600 Thanks to all! I purchased the Kidd book, gave it a quick read, liked it = a lot, and zipped it off to my sister-in-law's aunt. Great suggestions = all, and I'll keep everyone posted. She's doing great; five whole days = without a cig, and good progress on the other issues. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Lousy Movies Date: 27 Aug 2002 11:04:47 -0600 In a recent passing comment, Eric Snider mentioned the current hit comedy = (rimshot) Serving Sara as a particularly dreadful film. I haven't seen = it, because I have this rule; if I see a trailer for a film that's = supposed to be a comedy and nothing in the trailer is remotely amusing, = I'll give the flick a pass. But it occurred to me that we have lost, as = Americans, an entire generation's worth of lousy movies. We no longer = have drive-ins. Now, there are lots of terrible movies being made today, and this has = always been the case. But the movies we see today are star-driven, = Hollywood high concept flops, or their cousins, the pretentious avant-garde= art film wannabe flops. But we don't have any movies being made that are = supposed to be crappy. I mean, I can see the meetings for Serving Sara. = "A Friends star, Perry has a following, plus Liz Hurley, process servers = are always funny, it could be great." As awful as Attack of the Clones = was, it was clearly supposed to be good, and the production values are = amazing. I mean, Lucas clearly didn't intend to make a terrible film, and = in the immortal words of Richard Attenborough, "no expense was spared." But see, when I was a kid, me and my friends would go to the drive-ins all = the time. Every Friday without fail, we'd pile into my '63 push-button = Plymouth Fury (loved that car), and we'd go see the latest offerings from = American International. Mostly they starred people you'd never heard of, = or they starred TV actors stretching themselves. They were horror flicks, = or space monster movies, or beach party movies (those were dying out), = sometimes they were westerns, or action adventure/noir flicks. They were = uniformly terrible. That was the fun of them. They were cheaply made, = badly acted, badly photographed, and the story liines were idiotic, and = the special effects execrable. Boy were they fun. They are completely indefensible from any aesthetic, and probably any = moral point of view. They were gratuitously violent or sexy or both. In = fact, if the American International aesthetic could be summed up in one = word, it would be 'gratuitous.' =20 I'll never forget Hitchhike to Hell, featuring the guy that played the = professor on Gilligan's Island as a cop, or maybe a sheriff. In one = scene, he's talking to his deputy, and he says 'that crazed lunatic = wouldn't hurt a little girl, would he?" Immediately, the phone rings, he = listens sadly--he doesn't even say hello--hangs up, and says to the same = deputy, "we were wrong." Fabulous. I remember Nuns in Bondage. I = remember Kidnapped Coed. I absolutely loved The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. = I remember films in which a landing flying saucer from outer space was = represented by a pie plate tossed like a frisbee. =20 Okay, so why defend these films? Why do I think our kids are missing out = by not seeing any of them. I guess it's because they were fun. Movies today aren't much. We can't = just make an entertaining genre film anymore; we have to Make a Statement. = Or, when we do make fun films, they turn out not to be so much. American = International films were rarely intentionally funny, but boy were they = unintentionally. Plus, the point was to see them with friends, and make fun of them = together. I guess that's what I really miss, the wiseacre crowd in the = car. We see movies today in theatres, and we sit quietly through them. = Okay, we rent movies sometimes, and that's kinda fun. Maybe that's where = the drive-in flicks have gone. =20 But I sure do miss 'em. Bring back the drive-in. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William Morris Subject: Re: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 27 Aug 2002 12:39:42 -0700 (PDT) This news pleases me to no end. I'll let others deal with Mormon poets. But I have two quick recommendations based on their influence on major schools of Mormon poetry: In addition to Blake, Byron for his influence on Orson F. Whitney and home literature (Whitney admired Byron's [and the other Romantics, but Byron is the one whom I recall him referring to] energy and prophetic voice and often linked, as you mention, prophets and poets, claiming that each should be able to assert the role of the other). --And-- T.S. Eliot for his influence on the Mormon poetry that can be found in _Harvest_. It seems to me that much of the poetry in that collection follows Eliot's example of using compacted, tightly-wound imagery to capture religious experience. I esp. see his influence in the work of Dennis Clark and Clinton F. Larson. And then, of course, there's the whole Arthur Henry King connection. ~~William Morris -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] re: T3 Team Options OSC's _Lost Boys_ Date: 27 Aug 2002 16:06:24 -0500 Tom Kimball asks: >>Lost Boys ... The power behind this books is it's Mormonism. >>If they took out the Mormonism from a film version it wouldn't have the punch it needs and if they were to keep the Mormon angle it would not sell. Tom is correct when he says that _Lost Boys_ is an intensely Mormon novel. Mormonism, in name and not just outlook, overtly permeates the novel to a degree not present in any other work of science fiction or fantasy by Card. In fact, _Lost Boys_ is highly under-rated as one of the best, most accurate portrayals of contemporary Latter-day Saint life to be found in ANY nationally published novel. It was Orson Scott Card himself that stipulated that the current owners of the film rights make the characters religiously generic (non-LDS) in any adaptation that they produce. This is because he was not being contracted to write the screenplay -- he was being paid for the film rights so that somebody else will write the screenplay. Card stated that he did not want somebody else to mangle the Latter-day Saint aspect of the characters, recounting his experience that non-LDS writers--even well-intentioned ones--always mess up when trying to write LDS characters, getting the facts and attitudes wrong. Do you want Steven Soderbergh writing LDS characters in a "Lost Boys" movie? Or Trey Parker? George Lucas? Joe Esterhauz? If it's any consolation, film rights are bought all the time. I haven't heard anything that leads me to believe a "Lost Boys" movie is anywhere close to being greenlit. The rights could very well lapse and revert to Card before any actual movie is made. [Preston Hunter] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JLTyner Subject: Re: [AML] High School Literature Curriculum Date: 27 Aug 2002 14:12:38 -0700 My daughter and her friends absolutely love West Side Story! I think one of them introduced the rest of them to it, and they are well aware it was a retelling of Romeo and Juliet. Most of her friends are LDS, and some aren't, but they have routinely put it in the VCR when they have sleep-overs and dance and sing to it. They also like Grease, and Legally Blonde. They will occasionally tolerate my attempts to introduce them to other classic movies and musicals-I guess they sometimes have to find them on their own and sometimes be intoduced to them and hope if they if they're willing to have a looksee. I asked my son what were the books that appealed to him in high school. He read, but didn't like Catcher In The Rye, he thought it was stupid, in his opinion. I guess he also associates it with the murder of John Lennon. A teacher showed them a video about the book and Lennon's killer's obsession with it. He thought The Outsiders was okay and had never read That Was Then, This Is Now as I had. His book that "got him through" was Stephen King's-The Stand. He also loved Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984, those two seem to be classics that stand the test of time. My husband and I liked those too. He's also like my husband in his love and enjoyment of Sci-Fi/Fantasy books. He particularly likes the The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant The Unbeliever, The Dark Sword Trilogy The Out Of The Ashes Series and some OSC. I don't know if he's representative of the average college kid and their reading likes and dislikes both now and when they were in high school, but he could be a representative of a kid that's been a voracious reader who was bored by school, but did the work anyway to get through. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 18:49:03 -0600 Thom Duncan wrote: > As long as those folks don't read any real Church history, their testimonies > should remain unassailed. But what would we rather have, people who are > converted to the Church the way it really is (Levi Peterson), or the way > that Lund creates it? The problem with the latter is that you run the risk > of your converts turning out like me -- frustrated and somewhat angry when > they find out that Church leaders were much more human than they wsere > initially portrayed to be, or that the Church has tried to re-write its > official history. I can't help but ask--is Levi Peterson's vision the Church as it really is? And is Gerald Lund's version really any less real? It seems to me that both of them have chosen their eccentricities, and both of them tell a story fundamentally true to their own vision of the role and effectiveness of the Church. Personally, I don't see either as more real--though Peterson wins hands down in terms of interpretive depth, literary quality, and complexity. It seems like we sometimes reject any sense of verity in the stories we don't like and I find that fundamentally unfair. Peterson's version was true to his own experience and his own vision. But universal? I don't think so. And even where it is representative (at least in the broad strokes; I don't know how many of us have a brother who happily cuts off his genitals--literally or figuratively--so I hesitate to suggest it as common, no less universal), it's only representative of one kind of experience one can have. I just don't see it as an all-or-nothing proposition. Life is a mixture of the sublime, hopeful, disappointed, and ugly. Some find community within the supports set up by the institution and others feel fundamentally alone despite the people that surround them. Each experience is unique, and each speaks to a different hope or understanding. Peterson wouldn't seem nearly as literary if Lund wasn't also writing to large audiences. I would recommend both, with the caveat that both are fiction and reflect more than a little of their authors' individual stances and approaches. One hopes for greatness in all things as a result of the extraordinary foundations of both our religion and our culture, and the other is frustrated at the lack of greatness--and sometimes even simple adequacy--in the communities we've built for ourselves from those foundations. Both are true stories from their authors' perspectives. FWIW. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: lwilkins@fas.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 27 Aug 2002 20:41:19 -0400 This course sounds really interesting. When I saw the subject line I thought immediately of 20th century poetry. But it sounds like you are planning to cover mainly the early 19th century. Is this true? I took a graduate course in Political Romanticism a few semesters ago and was constantly surprised at the resonances with early Mormonism that our course readings entailed. It seems you could look at Transcendentalism (the American version of Romanticism) as a context in which to understand the role of the "poet/seer". Or read German Romantics, too. Goethe has a lot of great stuff that would fit your course goals, Schiller, too. If you looked at the 20th century, it seems the course would take a radically different turn. But maybe there's something about the idea of the seer that persists in the craft of poetry even in a modernized world. Perhaps this is especially true in the practice of Mormon hymn writing. --Laraine Wilkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] Marilyn Brown Books Date: 27 Aug 2002 15:57:12 -0700 You know, it's always a good day when you can make some good book purchases at DI. Today, there were two titles by Marilyn Brown that I've never owned -- "The Earthkeepers" and "The Wine-Dark Sea of Grass." Lots of other good stuff too, but this is what was particularly interesting to me. -- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "kumiko" Subject: [AML] Box Office Report 23 Aug. Date: 27 Aug 2002 20:00:30 -0500 Feature Films by LDS/Mormon Filmmakers and Actors Weekend Box Office Report (U.S. Domestic Box Office Gross) Weekend of August 23, 2002 Report compiled by: LDSFilm.com [If table below doesn't line up properly, try looking at them with a mono-spaced font, such as Courier - Ed.] Natl Film Title Weekend Gross Rank LDS/Mormon Filmmaker/Actor Total Gross Theaters Days --- ----------------------------- ----------- ----- ---- 12 Master of Disguise 2,121,014 1,737 24 Perry Andelin Blake (director) 34,194,816 15 Possession 1,148,836 343 10 Neil LaBute (director) 3,436,292 Aaron Eckhart (lead male actor) 21 Minority Report 425,584 407 66 Gerald Molen (producer) 129,828,482 30 Little Secrets 191,747 366 3 Blair Treu (producer/director) 191,747 Brian Sullivan (cinematographer) Sam Cardon (composer) Jerry Stayner (film editor) Actors: Jan Broberg Felt, Rick Macy, Tayva Patch, Caitlin E.J. Meyer 44 The Divine Secrets of the 63,725 118 80 Ya-Ya Sisterhood 68,800,560 36 ESPN's Ultimate X 47,287 32 108 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 3,953,076 64 Cirque du Soleil: Journey of Man 24,948 8 843 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,834,607 69 The Singles Ward 17,498 14 206 Kurt Hale (writer/director) 975,700 John E. Moyer (writer) Dave Hunter (producer) Cody Hale (composer) Ryan Little (cinematographer) Actors: Will Swenson, Connie Young, Daryn Tufts, Kirby Heyborne, Michael Birkeland, Robert Swenson, Wally Joyner, Lincoln Hoppe, Gretchen Whalley, Sedra Santos, etc. 72 The Believer 15,692 6 101 Ryan Gosling (lead actor) 300,896 78 Galapagos 10,393 4 1032 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,652,829 83 China: The Panda Adventure 8,814 6 395 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 2,800,972 95 Ziggy Stardust & Spiders from Mars 7,670 5 47 Mick Ronson (2nd billed actor) 81,102 108 The Other Side of Heaven 1,577 3 255 Mitch Davis (writer/director) 4,687,149 John H. Groberg (author/character) Gerald Molen, John Garbett (producers) 109 Mark Twain's America 3D 1,101 1 1515 Alan Williams (composer) 2,263,842 LITTLE SECRETS: Blair Treu's "Little Secrets" did not take the box office by storm. Hampered by a limited release (although technically it was a nationwide release), lacking strong promotional support from the studios that released it, handicapped by the incorrect perception that this is a film for kids only, and released at a time when those kids are starting to go back to school, the film only managed to gross $191,747 in its first weekend. The best hope for this film is that word-of-mouth will bolster its numbers in the coming weeks, because it really is well done with a great story that the whole family can enjoy. Reviews of the film have been mostly positive. RottenTomatoes.com rates it as "Fresh" (over 60% positive reviews). The nation's most prominent film critics, Ebert and Roeper, gave "Little Secrets" TWO THUMBS UP on their nationally-seen review show. Bold Prediction - Although "Little Secrets" box office gross for the weekend seems small in the face of even a limited nationwide release, it will still pass the $1 million mark in 6-8 weeks, if not sooner. SINGLES WARD WATCH: At its current performance level, "The Singles Ward" should pass the magical $1 million mark with two weeks. MOVIEGOERS CLAMOR TO SEE POSSESSION: Speaking of limited releases: Neil LaBute's "Possession" was still playing in only 343 theaters over the weekend - even less than "Little Secrets" - leaving interested moviegoers, especially in Utah, asking when they would be able to see it. We have not heard any definite news regarding a more extensive release of the film, which still took in almost $1.15 million in its 2nd weekend of release and ended up #15 nationwide, but we will keep you posted as information becomes available. "Possession" has already earned more at the box office than LaBute's first feature film "In The Company of Men", and looks poised to out-gross the $4.7 earned by his second film "Your Friends and Neighbors." AMERICAN GRACE: Latter-day Saint novelist Curtis Taylor is wrapping up principal photography of his feature film "American Grace" at the end of August. The coming-of-age story set in 1973 Modesto pays homage to Lucas' "American Grafitti," and is also a tribute to Taylor's hometown of Modesto, California, where the movie was filmed. Latter-day Saint actor/director Richard Dutcher and famed Latter-day Saint rock musician Randy Bachman both have supporting roles in the movie. TOP 10: The ldsfilm.com home page now features a list of the Top 10 LDS Directors. The list is limited to directors who are currently alive and working, and is based on U.S. box office gross. Check it out: http://www.ldsfilm.com/index.html You may be struck by the number of these directors listed there who only have only one or two theatrically-released films to their credit. For now, an aspiring director with a hit can quickly find themselves on the list. But the bar is continually being raised. NUMBER 6: "Serving Sara" opened nationwide in 2,154 theaters, taking in $5,758,236 at the box office over the weekend. This put the movie in 6th place nationwide. The movie featues Dallas-based Latter-day Saint actress Alaina Kalanj in a small role as the receptionist at the health spa. "Serving Sara" stars "Friends" star Matthew Perry and British actress Elizabeth Hurley. Kalanj, who teaches nursery in her home ward, had the fourth-billed role in the Cannes-screened feature film "Pendulum" (2001), starring alongside Rachel Hunter, James Russo and Matt Battaglia. Kalanj has also starred in a number of critically acclaimed short films and had a major guest role on the TV series "Dawson's Creek." "Serving Sara" is her first theatrically-released feature film. She is currently filming an independent feature film in Austin, Texas, in which she has the lead role. DANSIE: Salt Lake-area filmmaker Tucker Dansie has announced that his upcoming short film "Quarters & Rocks" (now in post production) has changed titles to "Two Nickels and a Dime." The film stars Clara Susan Morey II, who has a small part in "Little Secrets", and has a supporting role in the upcoming "Jack Weyland's Charly" (opening in three weeks across Utah), and a major supporting role in Mark Potter's upcoming feature "Suddenly Unexpected" (scheduled release: 2003). "Two Nickels and a Dime" is the 2nd in Dansie's "Lesson" series of films. Dansie is a Latter-day Saint and the films reflect positive values, but do not feature overtly LDS characters or exclusively LDS themes. 2ND LDS FILM FESTIVAL: If you want your film or screenplay showcased at the 2nd LDS Film Festival, to be held in October 2002, you'll need to hurry! Send in your work no later than September 15. A total of $2000.00 and the prestigious LIGHTBOX AWARD will be awarded to the best screenplays, films and videos. Everyone is invited to participate. You can download the entry form at http://www.ldsbox.com/cgi-bin/entry.php For more info on the festival: http://www.ldsbox.com/cgi-bin/festival.php FORGOTTEN VOYAGE NAMED "BEST DOCUMENTARY": A new documentary film by History Channel veteran and LDS director Scott Tiffany won Best Documentary at the Salt Lake City Film Festival. "Forgotten Voyage" tells the story of a group of nearly 250 Latter-day Saint men, women and children who fled persecution in 1846 by sailing from New York City around the treacherous tip of South America to California. They spent six months at sea and sailed 20,000 miles. The group settled San Francisco for America and its leader, Samuel Brannan, launched the California Gold Rush of 1849. The one-hour documentary features interviews with California's State Librarian-Historian, maritime experts and Western-American historians. "Forgotten Voyage" is available on video at the film's web site http://www.ForgottenVoyage.com. The World Congress of Families has announced it will screen winning films of the Salt Lake City Film Festival around the world. In 2003, "Forgotten Voyage" will be shown in such countries as Uganda, Egypt, the Czech Republic, Brazil, the United Kingdom and Russia. For more information, please e-mail Info@ForgottenVoyage.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 27 Aug 2002 19:44:53 -0600 Just to go along with what Preston discussed regarding "lag time." Many movies reached the SLC market months after their national release and buzz. For instance _Mememto_ opened here a long time after other venues (although he stayed at the Broadway a long time). Same with _In the Bedroom_. It seems like the Broadway gets those kind of "mainstream arthouse films." Then the Tower (crappy theatre) gets the more art house films. So even if _Possession_ doesn't come to the Broadway, it'll almost certainly come to The Tower. After it finishes its mainstream run it'll probably end up at Brewvies where you can order a sweet pizza and watch the film on a couch. Oddly some mainstream arthouse films, such as _Mulholland Drive_ only were at The Tower (and then later Brewvies). In that case I suggest you wait for it to come to Brewvies because the Tower is one of the worst theatres in Utah (IMO). -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 20:07:19 -0600 (MDT) > As long as those folks don't read any real Church history, their testimonies > should remain unassailed. But what would we rather have, people who are > converted to the Church the way it really is (Levi Peterson), or the way > that Lund creates it? I have to say that I disagree. Levi writes well about a certain segment of the churce, but methinks he exaggerates (for good effect) a bit. Also, it is a skewed picture if that is all you read. Yes, it may be what the culture (not the Church with a capital C) is "really like" - but only in one small segment. There's a lot more to the church then sexually repressed men who cut of their own genitals or impregnate Lutherans. I like Levi's work, but to claim it is how we "really are" is a bit much. --Ivan Wolfe -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 21:00:37 -0600 Thom Wrote: hey find out that Church leaders were much more human than they wsere > initially portrayed to be, or that the Church has tried to re-write its > official history. > That's the only way I can think of to do institutional repentance. Maybe I just don't understand that idea very well. (It wouldn't be the first time.) Paris Anderson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fred C Pinnegar Subject: Re: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 27 Aug 2002 21:08:19 -0600 (MDT) Lynette said: My only thought as a former BYU student who loved "Ma Bell's" poetry class on the writings of women is this: don't forget the simple. We sometimes get so caught up in the effort to prove that we are sophisticated and educated that we forget the simple joys. . . . Emma Lou Thayne comes to mind. I have not dug that book out for a while, and it seems that some of that is too bent on issues. However, there a few simple ones there that can be enjoyed for face value, left unspoiled by "archeological digs". Lynette Reply: I think the gospel is infinitely simple and infinitely complex at the same time, and I would never under rate the complexity of a simple poet. Emerson and Thoreau helped us to see, after all, the world in a grain of sand or a leave of grass. I spent a few years incarcerated in the Primary as punishment for lack of humility (as the Bishop explained my calling to me), but I made the most of it before they expelled me from there as well after making a Sharing Time presentation which made their eyes start from their heads and evoked an immediate point by point refutation from the counselor conducting. Paris Anderson would have appreciated it. One of the good things about the experience, however, was learning the lyrics, the poetry, of those great and simple Primary songs. Can you suggest two or three of your favorite Thayne poems and what you like about them? Thanks for your suggestion. Fred Pinnegar -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 20:20:48 -0700 What is "Mormonville"??? Did I miss that discussion? Brown wrote: > I agree with Annette. (And sorry I haven't read yours yet, Annette, LOST > WITHOUT YOU. It's one I definitely want to read!) The totally correct answer > to the BIG QUESTION everyone is asking here is for an investigator to read > Jeff Call's MORMONVILLE. We're getting some great REALLY Mormon "stuff" now > that doesn't smack of irony or tongue in cheek "objectivism." If we can't > see this development, we're high-hatting. Happy reading! Marilyn Brown > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Fred C Pinnegar Subject: Re: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 27 Aug 2002 21:33:54 -0600 (MDT) Laraine Wilkins said: it sounds like you are planning to cover mainly the early 19th century. Is this true? NO. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT PRECURSORS, BOTH THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES, AS WELL AS CURRENT WRITERS, ALL ABOUT EQUALLY. It seems you could look at Transcendentalism (the American > version of Romanticism) as a context in which to understand the role of the > "poet/seer". . . . EVEN MORE POWERFUL IS THE ROLE OF NINETEENTH CENTURY UNITARIANISM (OF WHICH TRANSCENDENTALISM WAS A CHILD), FOR NEARLY EVERY MAJOR 19TH CENTURY WRITER IN OUR AMERICAN LIT ANTHOLOGIES WAS A UNITARIAN, AND IT HAD A PROFOUND IMPACT ON OUR LDS PERCEPTIONS OF EDUCATION. FOR EXAMPLE, WHENEVER WE TALK ABOUT MORAL EDUCATION AND CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT WE ARE ECHOING UNITARIAN EDUCATIONAL IDEAS. DAVID O. MCKAY OFTEN SOUNDS LIKE A NINETEENTH CENTURY UNITARIAN MINISTER TO ME. > > But maybe there's something about the idea of the seer that > persists in the craft of poetry even in a modernized world. Perhaps this is > especially true in the practice of Mormon hymn writing. > THAT WOULD BE MY IMPRESSION. A SEER IS ONE WHO SEES THINGS MORE CLEARLY, ACCURATELY, AND DEEPLY THAN OTHERS,AND ONE WHO ARTICULATES THAT VISION OF REALITY IN POWERFUL AND INSIGHTFUL WAYS. IT IS ALWAYS INTERESTING TO ME TO HEAR APOSTLES AND PROPHETS SLIP INTO THE CADENCES OF FREE VERSE WHILE THEY ARE TALKING. CHECK JOSEPH SMITH IN THE 88TH SECTION, OR TRY SECTIONS OF A CONFERENCE TALK, THE MOST POWERFUL MOMENTS OF IT INTO POETIC LINES, IN THE SAME WAY THAT CAPTAIN AHAB BREAKS INTO BLANK VERSE IN THE QUARTERDECK CHAPTER OF MOBY-DICK. IT IS NOT SET UP ON THE PAGE AS BLANK VERSE, OF COURSE, BUT IT DOES SCAN NICELY INTO POETIC LINES. THANKS FOR YOUR SUGGESTIONS AND COMMENTS. FRED PINNEGAR -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Lousy Movies Date: 27 Aug 2002 21:37:58 -0700 Eric Samuelson convincingly wrote: "Bring back the drive-in"... I wasn't at the drive-in until the 70's, but talking about lousy movies, what about _Barbarella_ with Jane Fonda? Now that was horrible and funny... We get our "wiseacre" kicks from watching Mystery Science Theater 3000 or whatever it's officially called, where the dude and his bowling pin robotic counter parts are forced to sit through bad movies. Their running commentaries are what make those movies hilarious. I can see you'd be very good at that, Eric. Unfortuneately, today's bad movies (which seem to be aimed at the adolescent mindset) are filled with slasher gore. I can't stand to watch them. They must create numbness in the teenage minds who seem to be attracted to them. Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 27 Aug 2002 22:19:42 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- > > I can't help but ask--is Levi Peterson's vision the Church as it really is? It's real for more people than most people think. > And is Gerald Lund's version really any less real? It's real for people who like to remain at a certain intelletual plateau. > It seems to me that both > of them have chosen their eccentricities, and both of them tell a story > fundamentally true to their own vision of the role and effectiveness of the > Church. Personally, I don't see either as more real--though Peterson wins > hands down in terms of interpretive depth, literary quality, and complexity. There you go. > I would recommend both, with the caveat that both are fiction and reflect > more than a little of their authors' individual stances and approaches. People who would read and like Peterson would not require a caveat that the stories are fiction. How many people have written Levi and asked him if the Cowboy Jesus were real. And I'm not sure a caveat would help those folks who like Lund. If they can't tell from reading the book that the Steeds are a fictional family... > Both are > true stories from their authors' perspectives. > My point would be that, given both authors as the source of someone's testimonies, the reader of Peterson will have less of a traumatic membership while the reader of Lund will more likely falter when they learn that Joseph Smith was nowhere near as flawless as he is portrayed. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Hymns Celebrating Polygamy--Update Date: 27 Aug 2002 23:52:39 -0700 > In the appendix to _Exemplary Elder: The Life and Missionary Diaries > of Perrigrine Sessions, 1814-1893_ are a number of hymns Perrigrine > had copied into his diary. One of our favorites at BYU Studies is > "Fishing for Wives": This one sounds it was sung to the same tune as the old pioneer song that begins: Oh what a desert place was this when first the Mormons found it They said no white man could live here and Indians prowled around it. They said the land it was no good and the water was no gooder and the bare idear of livin' here was enough to make one shudder Chorus: Mesquite, and soap root, prickly pears, and briars, St George 'ere long will be a place that everyone admires. I think it's a perfect fit, right down to the sirs, which are also in the next verse or two of this one. The tune sounds very Scottish to me, also, and definitely not for Sunday services. If my guess is right, (and I'm as ignorant as all get-out with this stuff, so I will not be surprised to be told I'm deluding myself on this) does that mean songs like this were actually hymns to be sung in sacrament meeting, or were they just tongue-in-cheek songs? (I hope my husband's joke was understood -- I guess you'd have to have been there and felt the exhaustion we were both feeling at the long, involved *discussion* we worked so hard not to turn into a big fight. ;-)) Kathy Fowkes -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 28 Aug 2002 08:50:23 -0600 Hey, Thom, I disagree that the church is really like Levi Peterson's portrayal! (Sorry) Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Snow Subject: [AML] Re: Polygamy Hymns Update Date: 28 Aug 2002 07:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Thanks to Kathy and Morgan for their input on this deep and profound topic. I think it's worthy of a Master's Thesis and possibly Federal funding. Ed Snow ===== Read free excerpts from _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_, a Signature Books Bestseller at http://www.signaturebooks.com/bestsell.htm __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Lousy Movies Date: 28 Aug 2002 11:02:49 -0400 I'm away from home right now, so I get to talk to my kids on the phone. Last time they called they were all clamoring about seeing Star Wars II in the dollar theater. The younger boys told me all about how they loved it, except for the love scenes (which really means all the fight scenes). My youngest daughter told me how long she waited to figure out what was happening. The oldest three daughters all told me how many things they found to make fun of, from technical gaffs to bad dialogue. They all seem well entertained. They called me from the cell phone, on the way home. So even though they probably were relatively quiet in the theater, they qualified fine in "wise-crack crowd in the car" department. Believe me. I was on the other end of the film. I wonder if it really matters whether a film is intentionally bad, or just bad by accident. I know a lot of people, including my kids, would not label SWII "bad", but it seems to fit in at, at least, Eric's description. BTW Eric, we still have drive-ins in Ohio. But they show all the same movies that are in the theaters. I haven't been, so I wonder, if you sat in a car with a crowd of teen-agers, would they being having the same kind of fun with these films that you had with the AI of the past? Is it the drive-ins that are gone, or the made-for-drive-in movies? Tracie Laulusa -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Dixon" Subject: Re: [AML] Deadline for LDS Film Festival Date: 28 Aug 2002 11:20:40 -0400 >In the last two months, the "Best of 2001" program >has been successfully screened in Italy, Oklahoma, >and at the Salt Lake City Film Festival last >weekend. > >The program is available for another month. If you >are interested in organizing a screening, please >contact us at info@ldsbox.com. Is anyone in the Washington DC area interested in organizing a screening? Eric D. Dixon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Amelia Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Institutional Repentance Date: 28 Aug 2002 11:52:40 -0400 Scott Parkin wrote: "What I was mainly trying to respond to was not whether every participant in the civil rights movement has (and had) pure intent, but rather to contest the idea that because an unnamed general authority once made statements to the effect that the civil rights movement was a communist plot (a belief I vehemently disagree with, btw) does not make that GA wrong in every other instance, nor does it condemn that GA's core morality, personal goodness, or general godliness. Similarly, it does not generally indict the leadership of the Church as racist or dismissive of the real struggles of a socially and legally oppressed underclass to be treated with both social and legal equality and dignity." I agree completely with Scott. One person's statement, whether that one person speaks as a general authority or as a Sunday school teacher in my ward, is not indicative of that person's total morality. Nor does it condemn the church as racist, elitist, oppressive, etc. My concern is not with when the statement is made but with when the statement becomes institutionalized--when it becomes a widely held belief or when it is embodied in such a way as to give it the potential to become a widely held belief by members of the institution. Scott again: "[...] The fact that it even *can* be argued that the GA was not fully wrong in his claim was intended to support the idea that we should reserve our judgment of other peoples' intentions or goodness and focus on our own. [...] We should be as charitable as possible in viewing the motives of our brothers and sisters." Again, I wholeheartedly agree. However, I would argue that this must be true of not only individuals but also the institutional church. The church, as a body that creates texts and artworks, needs to be careful to reserve its judgment of other peoples' and or institutions' beliefs and opinions. Scott again: "[...] I'm not entirely sure how that equates to an American Heritage textbook claiming that student protesters of the Vietnam war were just bored, because I don't believe I dismissed either the civil rights movement or the majority of its supporters as anything but a good thing (even those whose motives may not have been pure ended up helping to bring about an important social and legal transformation)." Let me try to explain this a bit. When I first began reading Scott's post, I was pretty disgusted with the statement about the civil rights movement and communism and the fact that it seemed that Scott was defending it. By the end of the post, I realized that Scott was not defending that statement but I was still upset by the initial statement he quoted. The problem is that although I can say "I disagree with General Authority X when he stated that..." it becomes a completely different beast when that statement is embodied in text. That's what happens with the written word--text grants a statement more authority than when it existed only as a spoken statement. So as soon as we record the statements of a general authority in the Ensign, for instance, it becomes more difficult to repudiate that statement, even in our own minds. And when the attitude underlying a statement is given even more authority by being translated into a text book--a supposedly objective textbook--then we're really entering dangerous territory. And at that point, I begin to hold the church as an institution responsible. The American Heritage textbook is written by a BYU professor, published by BYU, and all BYU students are required to read it and study it. Not only that, the question I talked about in my previous post shows up in a practice test. So not only does it have the authority of a text but it has the added authority of correctness on a test. Now I can dismiss that. A lot of people can dismiss that. But not everyone can. And even if it is dismissed, the church is still the institution behind the statement. And the statement is not charitable when considering others' motives and intentions. Nor is it a statement that focuses attention on our own motives but rather focuses a critical destructive attention on the protestors of the Vietnam war. That's what an American Heritage text has to do with this. My problem is with the fact that a book sponsored by an institution proposed something so objectionable. Hope that all makes sense. And I hope it's clear why I think this is pertinent to a discussion of Mormon letters. amelia _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Books for Newspaper Reporter Date: 28 Aug 2002 14:11:43 -0500 I received the request below. Any suggestions for some good books or websites? Please feel free to respond directly to me. - Preston -- Dear Mr. Hunter, I am a newspaper reporter in Baton Rouge LA. I'm profiling a couple of Mormon missionaries (from Idaho and Utah) who are here to spread their word. I have found a few web sites and books that have helped. I'm just wondering if you have any recomendations (as in more websites and books) for understanding a) the religion b) how effective the missionaries are and c) how they manage to be so well organized and what has compelled them to be so organized. Things like that. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Lisa Tait" Subject: Re: [AML] Course on Mormon Poetry Date: 28 Aug 2002 16:04:57 -0500 Fred, I wish I could take your class! Please let us know how it goes. I assume that you plan to include Susan Howe and her book "Stone Spirits." I recently read Marden Clark's book "Moods: Of Late." It's a nice example of mid-20th century form and sensibility. Going back farther, of course there is Orson F. Whitney's (he who called for "Miltons and Shakespeares of our own") attempt to turn the Restoration into an epic poem. I'm sorry but I can't pull the title out of my head. (Anyone?) I think you also need to include some of the 19th century women's poetry--Eliza R. Snow, of course, and probably Emmeline B. Wells. But also a cross-section of poetry that appeared in the periodicals--the Exponent, the Young Women's Journal for sure; I can't remember how much there is in the Juvenile Instructor and the Contributor. And then into the 20th century you have the Relief Society Magazine and others. It depends, I suppose, on what your focus is. When you say "major" poets, that suggests a certain approach that might exclude some of the more "lowbrow" poetry. But I would argue that it's the "lowbrow" stuff that really defines Mormon poetry. From the GAs on down to your local Relief Society, poetry serves a definite function in Mormon culture--basically, to express gospel truths in "poetic language." Anything that requires too much work on the part of the reader isn't going to have much recognition or circulation. I think Mormons love poetry--just not the kind that people like us automatically consider studying for a class like yours. I think you should include at least a sub-unit within the course that discusses the uses and concepts of poetry on a lay level. Finally, I have to put in another shameless plug for Seamus Heaney. The tensions in his work between aesthetics and politics, and many of his discussions regarding same, have some compelling parallels for Mormons and Mormon artists. I might have some titles and ideas for you if you want to email me off-list. [MOD: Not to discourage Lisa and Fred from talking more between themselves, but this is really, really appropriate for AML-List. So I'd be glad to see more of the discussion here as well...] Lisa Tait -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: margaret young Subject: [AML] Teaching Literary Devices Etc. Date: 28 Aug 2002 15:21:58 -0600 I'm writing from my "Mother Bear" position today. Yesterday, my foster son showed me his English homework from the "special" school he attends. He has some needs a public school can't fill yet, and this school is to prepare him for a regular high school. The homework consisted of literary terms (metaphor, simile, hyperbole, etc.--a whole big list) and poems using the various devices. Had I not checked his homework, several of his answers would've consisted of "I don't understand" or "I don't get it." When I read the poetry, I sure understood his problem. Robert Burns (with the Scottish spellng) is not going to do a whole lot for an African American kid who has just come from an extremely difficult situation. All the poems were Eurocentric, and most would challenge a college student. I was frankly appalled. (I guess I'm just naive.) I went downstairs and got some literature more relavant to who HE is and taught him the literary devices from Langston Hughes and Martin Luther King's work. Of course, he can learn from some of the European writers, but they're not doing a thing for him right now except turning him off to reading. I want to have Christ Crowe autograph the book he has just completed--which title I don't recall. Has anyone read it? Other suggestions for African American students (with special needs)? How about Hispanic students? [Margaret Young] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Midway Swiss Days Date: 28 Aug 2002 14:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Those of you on the list who can make it should come check out Midway Swiss Days in the beautiful Heber Valley on August 30-31. There will be lots of food, music, and fun. I will be the big guy with the beard singing in the Swiss Chorus. Further info is at: http://www.midwayswissdays.com/index.html ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: [AML] BYU Education Week Event Date: 28 Aug 2002 19:03:14 -0600 Okay, I know I'm preaching to the choir to some extent, but I've got to express this somewhere. I find this recent article appalling (link: http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/39595). I hope this doesn't violate list guidelines, but I don't think I'm criticizing the brethren when I call this kind of thing foolish and unworthy of our best. It has to do with Education Week and an event there that uses mob-think methods to inculcate a dubious message. Ronald Bartholomew, a seminary teacher and an apparently popular youth speaker, gave a presentation on Monday. A sample: He calls this leadership. And he peddles the same act in other places: It'd be one thing if he was seen as an amusing cultural phenomenon, but he's presenting at BYU's Education Week and the youth come back with quotes like these: <"I thought that was pretty cool," said Wyatt Jones from Concord, California. This lecture was worth coming to "because it was amazing," said Mary-Elisabeth Thomas from Provo.> I think we'd be better off without him at Education Week--his actions tempt me to rechristen it Indoctrination Week (or Re-Education Week...). I can almost hear their brains atrophying in those quotes. I worry about the message this gives to our youth (I know how I would have received it when I was young--as a stupid, empty mob action), and I worry about what message this sends to others outside the church because it smacks so much of cultish mind-control (as well as provincialism and other less-savory cultural manifestations). And I worry because I have unconventional tastes in music and have CDs from groups that often find themselves used for batting practice--Def Leppard, Poison, and Metallica for example. And I worry that the categorization is so broad--anything that "doesn't invite the Spirit" is slated for destruction. I mean, the vast majority of *everything* doesn't actively "invite the Spirit". Using that for a criteria of censure not only suffers the usual difficulties of subjective evaluation, but also sets a standard that is unattainable in this Telestial world. And I would argue it is an undesirable standard. How can you relate to, understand, or converse with anybody outside the church if you shut yourself off from everything that is even Spirit-neutral? I'm not saying that we shouldn't discriminate (though I tend to think of it in terms of discernment) in our tastes and in the things we will do--including the music we listen to. I have no quarrel with anyone who won't listen to, say, Def Leppard because they feel it drives the Spirit away (for them, that may well be true). And I have no quarrel with anyone who wants to discuss with others those things they find antagonistic to the Spirit, even in large groups like at Education Week. But I have a great deal of difficulty with gathering in large groups that act as a mob to destroy broad swathes of things they find momentarily objectionable. Oh, and I've always found it interesting as an LDS cultural phenomenon who we choose to incinerate--how many Backstreet Boys CDs survived the carnage when I consider them far worse spiritually than Metallica. Which is evidence of my subjective personal judgement, really :). Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Re: Mormon Plays (Andrew's Poll) (Comp 2) Date: 28 Aug 2002 22:51:11 -0500 [MOD: This is a compilation post of responses to Larry Jackson's query.] >From leeallred@rmi.net Tue Aug 27 20:42:07 2002 Larry Jackson asked: --- "I saw a play at BYU in January or February of 1970 about Korihor...Anyone know what it might have been and who wrote it?" --- Sounds like "The Tragedy of Korihor" (and I'm blanking on the name of the playwright) that was (I think) part of the Mormon Festival of Arts held at BYU around 1970-1 or so. BYU put out a postum table photo essay book on the festival: Wheelwright, Lorin F. and Lael J. Woodbury (Editors). Mormon Arts, Volume One: Featuring articles and art work by Mormon artists and authors. (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1972). I have the book back home in Orem, but unfortunately, I'm in Denver right now, or I'd look it up... FWIW, the play was the central theme of a Kathy D. Pullins' Womens Conference talk this year, "Choose You This Day." (http://ce.byu.edu/cw/cwwomens/archive/2002/kd_pullins.htm) --Lee Allred >From andrewrhall@hotmail.com Tue Aug 27 21:57:21 2002 There was a play by Louise Hanson called "The Tragedy of Korihor" which was performed at the 1974 BYU Mormon Festival of Arts. That might be the one. [Andrew Hall] >From ThomDuncan@prodigy.net Tue Aug 27 21:57:30 2002 It was called Korihor. It starred Craig Costello and my ex-wife had a minor role. It was full-length play as I recall. It was written by a woman whose name escapes me. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: RE: [AML] _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 28 Aug 2002 23:39:27 -0400 (EDT) "Possession" is opening at several SLC-area theaters this weekend. It's a good movie, but not a great one. I suppose a review is forthcoming. In defense of the Tower Theatre (Clark Goble made some comments), I will concur that the theater is a bit run-down, but I think that adds to its charm. More importantly, however, is that for ages it was the only place where you could consistently see arthouse films in Salt Lake City. Brewvies would get them now and then, and you'd see them at Broadway or even the Century 16 sometimes. But the Tower was all arthouse, all the time, and you could count on it. I wish they could earn enough money to fix the place up, too, but you can only make so much being an arthouse. Now, the Broadway is under new management and is essentially becoming a Tower multiplex -- six screens of arthouse stuff. (A few films under contract from before the changeover, like "Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood," are unfortunately still there.) I doubt SLC can support a total of seven screens of art films, but it's great for the community that they're all there, for however long it lasts. The Tower's getting mostly artsy arthouse films while the Broadway got more mainstream ones was more coincidence than design. Believe, me the Tower loooooves when it can get a more mainstream (i.e., more profitable) film. But Tower management has placed a higher value on artistic merit than on making money (though this has not stopped it from showing some truly boring movies at times). I don't work for the Tower, so I'll stop. But I like the place, and I like what they do, and I hope they and the Broadway can survive while showing films you can't see anywhere else. Eric D. Snider -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Democratization of Opinions Date: 28 Aug 2002 20:42:02 -0700 on 8/26/02 10:54 PM, Scott Parkin at scottparkin@earthlink.net wrote: > I admit that I would like to hear more from our qualified people on this > list, though. How do we encourage that while still allowing each of us to > exercise the right to express our unqualified opinions? What constitutes qualified? The academy has gotten farther and farther away from reality for more than fifty years. There's a reason that philosophy no longer has the influence it once did. Upon a time a philosopher's words could eventually become common belief, and that time was not so long ago. Since the '30s it has become less and less likely as the theories taught in schools journey farther into the misty netherworld. I personally blame socialism--the miracle of socialism is that it somehow convinced intellectuals that they would be better off in a society where they would be slaves. The proles would merely be serfs, but in every socialist society thus far it is the intellectuals that suffer the worst slavery. Every aspect of their lives is informed by ideology. This is something they push for, wish for, and dream about constantly. Most people don't even know socialism when it bites them, and universities are rife with it. How does studying fantasies and delusions make one qualified? I had a devil of a time in college. When I started I had already read most major philosophers and lots of delusional writers like Marx and Mao and Hitler. I came very close to fighting with my professors on several occasions. If you knew me personally you would no how ludicrous that is--I was very shy and diffident at 18. Just arguing with my sociology prof was a painful experience, but I just couldn't swallow the khat he were trying to feed me. My western civ prof was trying to disprove the bible to everyone and I argued with him too. There were people in my class who groaned aloud when he explained the "origin" of the flood myth in Gilgamesh. Another time I couldn't sit still. The list goes on and on, and happened as often at BYU as at ASU. Then I started working for an Apple education dealer and worked with professors as a veritable equal...if there could be any equals to such peerless paragons of virtue and wisdom. The old saw about "those who can't do, teach" is true far to often, but strangely enough it's high school and college where the worst ones congregate. Forget about qualifications. Go to the source. There are plenty of silly books in the world and there's no need for a silly person to explain them. Jim Wilson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Lousy Movies Date: 28 Aug 2002 20:59:30 -0700 on 8/27/02 9:37 PM, Kim Madsen at kcmadsen@utah-inter.net wrote: > Unfortuneately, today's bad movies (which seem to be aimed at the > adolescent mindset) are filled with slasher gore. I can't stand > to watch them. They must create numbness in the teenage minds who > seem to be attracted to them. > > Kim Madsen > That is certainly something I don't understand. What's the pleasure in watching girls and their inept boyfriends getting killed by some supernatural killer? I have seen a ton of horror movies because when I was twelve _Halloween_ scared me. None of the others have, but I keep hoping. _The Blair Witch Project_ was purported to be scary but it wasn't even close. I see pretty much any ghost movie that comes out but at best they only rise to creepy. *Sigh.* I don't know about it creating numbness, however. They're too goofy and unrealistic to be desensitizing. I think people like them because they're "fun" like Eric says. That latest Jason movie is obviously not supposed to be scary--it's painfully ludicrous. The Scream movies were of the same goof-ball quality. Drive-in movies are still around, they just have larger budgets and "respected" directors make them. There are still occasional gems, however, and I'm always hoping for more. Of course, I haven't seen a gem of a ghost story since _The Sixth Sense_ and it was only scary because of sympathy for the kid's fright. Oh well, maybe next year. Jim Wilson aka The Laird Jim -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 28 Aug 2002 22:35:30 -0600 Thom Duncan wrote: > People who would read and like Peterson would not require a caveat that the > stories are fiction. How many people have written Levi and asked him if the > Cowboy Jesus were real. And I'm not sure a caveat would help those folks who > like Lund. If they can't tell from reading the book that the Steeds are a > fictional family... You'd have to aks Levi about how many people have taken parts of his novel as history rather than fiction. I suspect more than a few believe that at least parts of his plot lines are taken from direct experience--making them not one bit different that Lund's readers--or of any other large readership. It just seems a little too glib for me. I think we sometimes characterize a large readership by the anecdotal evidence of a few of the wingnuts and think we've got the whole thing covered, but again I think that's an essentially unfair approach. Given that Lund's books have been read by a *far* larger readership (and is accessible to a far larger readership), the number of unsophisticated readers is likely to be substantially higher than in Peterson's case. Lund chooses to write fiction that dramatizes real history, and some of those readers are taken in by the device. I know that an awful lot of people don't know where the lines between fact and dramatization are in _Roots,_ but I don't hear condemning judgment against either Haley or his readers on that point. But I have heard the argument on this list many times that the odd responses of readers should not be blamed on the author--that the author is not responsible for readers who don't understand the author's devices--so I'm not sure why Lund should be the special recipient of blame because some of his readers fail to see where the lines between history and fiction are. A great many people take Oliver Stone seriously, and I still can't figure out why. In any case, the caveat is one that I think applies to all readers whether they're literarily sophisticated or not. Maybe no one should need to be reminded, but the simple fact is that even sophisticated readers miss the boat on a fairly regular basis. The difference is that they're too embarrassed to admit it in public, so we hear less about their mistakes of interpretation. > My point would be that, given both authors as the source of someone's > testimonies, the reader of Peterson will have less of a traumatic membership > while the reader of Lund will more likely falter when they learn that Joseph > Smith was nowhere near as flawless as he is portrayed. Any reader who derives a testimony from a work of fiction is building on a weak foundation, regardless of the literary quality of the work. Testimonies should be based on study, prayer, and the examination of *many* sources rather than the anecdotal commentary of one or two novelists. My point remains that anyone who only seeks one source of input starts from a knowably weak foundation and has no right to blame anyone else for their own failure to seek and learn more. I can't deny that many people have had very poor experiences in the Church (I'm one of them). But I also know for a fact that a great many people never have the kinds of difficult or challenging experiences that you or I may have had. Each of us has our own beliefs, but I can't bring myself to make a blanket judgment that calls readers of one kind of novel good and the readers of another kind of novel silly. I don't think it's that simple. In any case, when recommending a novel or a work of history to a reader you should always have a sense of who the reader is and whether the work is appropriate for that person. Other than water and air, there are precious few things that are universally acceptable or effective for all people. Not every reader will gain value from Peterson, and to suggest that it be Peterson's vision or nothing creates what I see as an arbitrary line that defines one approach only and leave the rest of the world out in the cold. The time will come when such lines will be drawn. But I don't believe the time is now, and I don't believe that Levi Peterson will be the benchmark by which the worthy are defined--or at least not the sole benchmark. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Lousy Movies Date: 28 Aug 2002 22:30:11 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:37 PM > Eric Samuelson convincingly wrote: > "Bring back the drive-in"... > > I wasn't at the drive-in until the 70's, but talking about lousy > movies, what about _Barbarella_ with Jane Fonda? Now that was > horrible and funny... I talked my French misisonary companion into seeing it so we could practicing listening to French. I wanted to see it because it was based on a French comic book character. I didn't know, though, what French comics were like and so was somewhat surprised at the opening scene. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 28 Aug 2002 22:35:12 -0600 The problem is, imo, is that a reading of Church history, culture, etc. where such things as Levi writes about are NOT present casts what can be an unhealthy patina over a new convert. Without an awareness of such LDS idiosyncrasies, one can get the impression, for instance, that the sins which are the common lot of Man don't exist among the LDS. Thom ----- Original Message ----- > Hey, Thom, I disagree that the church is really like Levi Peterson's > portrayal! (Sorry) Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Democratization of Opinions Date: 28 Aug 2002 22:58:42 -0600 Jim Wilson wrote: > What constitutes qualified? The academy has gotten farther and farther away > from reality for more than fifty years. [SNIP] > Forget about qualifications. Go to the source. There are plenty of silly > books in the world and there's no need for a silly person to explain them. This comes down to my own mistrust, but I live in a world populated by a great many well-spoken, intelligent sounding wingnuts, at least one of whom is willing to argue pretty much any point convincingly. I know that I have been very strongly convinced of things in the past that I now cringe to think about, and that fact leads me to seek the most qualified sources I can. So when I wish that more people trained in literary criticism offer their thoughts on this list, my goal remains that I very much want to hear the (often conflicting) opinions of those who have studied a subject extensively and who have already engaged in extended discussions in other forums. Not because I necessarily accept their conclusions as authoritative, but because I trust that their extended perspective will help me reach my own conclusions much more quickly and with fewer wrong turns and false starts. Learning the process by which some conclusions are reached is at least as interesting to me as knowing the conclusions themselves. Given the choice of trusting someone who has thought a lot about an issue and someone who just spouts off, I'm inclined to listen more attentively to the one who has studied--and to cross check against others who have studied, in addition to the ordinary folks. It just seems like good investigative technique to me. Wisdom is not the sole province of the academy, but it does suggest a baseline of study that gives some opinions both more weight and more extended consideration than others. Of course authority can be misused, which is why we should always seek multiple sources for any subject. Study and pondering isn't just for scriptures. Scott Parkin (who one argued convincingly that "plebians" were wooly mountain goats in the Himalayas and convinced more than one other high school student of the fact) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Steve Perry" Subject: [AML] PERRY & PAYNE, _FAMILY_ Date: 28 Aug 2002 23:41:48 -0600 Hi listers, Here is an article on the latest LDS literature (well, it does have lyrics) Marvin Payne and I have been up to lately. http://www.ucjournal.com/ucjournal/pagespeed/url/News/story/562054 The article is accurate except for the spelling of the website which is listed correctly in the signature below. :-) Steve -- skperry@mac.com http://www.StevenKappPerry.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Revelation and Style Date: 29 Aug 2002 00:32:18 -0700 On Tues, 20 Aug 2002 Kathy Fowkes posted the following account: >>>>> My first experience with receiving revelation from the Spirit that I *knew* was revelation was my moment of conversion when I asked in my mind if the Book of Mormon was true as the missionaries were teaching me about it at the beginning of our first discussion, and in answer a pinpoint of light burst into existence in the void of my heart (I saw it in my mind as a great blackness, darker and emptier than space). That light grew until it filled my whole body. I felt it as warmth and joy and peace unmatched by anything in my experience until then, and saw it in my mind's eye as light filling me and pouring out of me. That light was accompanied by words to my mind. Five statements carried with an undeniable witness to my heart of their truth, but they were part impression and part specific words. God lives, Jesus Christ is the Son of God and everything the Bible says about him is true, He is my personal Savior, the Book of Mormon is also the word of God, and finally, listen to the missionaries here before you, you can trust everything they say because what they teach is of Me, it is true, and you have no need to fear or doubt their words to you. When I heard the words "God lives!" I heard them with such power I can still feel it to this day, more than 20 years later. With the words came the realization that he not only lived, but KNEW me, had been watching over me all this time, and would always be there for me. Before that for years I had questioned and agonized and shaken my fist at heaven because of the total lack of sure guidance in the world, and what I felt was abondonement by God -- if he ever had existed, I felt that he had turned his back on us down here. But that's how the whole 'light' and 'darkness' thing started for me -- it was my first lesson in how the Spirit 'feels' so it's become how I feel the Spirit most often. <<<<< After this account Kathy gave some commentary from herself and others about how to prepare for and seek revelation then said, > I don't think I'm "special" beyond how everyone is special as a son > or daughter of God. I'm certainly not better than anyone, and I > frequently feel worse! Like Linda, I was watching this thread, but > afraid to reply, for fear of appearing puffed up or holier-than-thou. Thom Duncan replied, Wed, 21 Aug 2002: > The only way you would appear holier-than-thou would be if you were > to imply that the only way to receive revelation from god was through > words to the mind. You didn't do that. Instead, you delivered what I > consider to be a marvelously simple testimony of how God speaks to > you personally without suggesting that other ways are inferior. I had a similar reaction, but before I talk about it, one brief (hah!) comment about the "fear of appearing puffed up or holier-than-thou." The power of revelation is an ancient cultural theme, the idea that to approach the holy or the divine you have to cleanse yourself. The flip side of that idea, that an encounter with the divine is evidence you've cleansed yourself, is also an ancient theme. It doesn't take much thought or experience though to realize how easy it is to corrupt or manipulate people's yearning for divine communion, how easy to claim revelations or righteousness you don't have, and writers like to explore corruption--maybe because artists often sense a muse or some other spiritual power that helps them express their gifts. If you understand your artistic gifts in spiritual terms it can be difficult to grasp why people would choose to corrupt or manipulate spiritual powers. That may be why so many artists explore spiritual corruption--as a way of trying to understand the incomprehensible. When I started writing this I was thinking particularly of stories aboul religious hypocrites, like Tartuffe, The Scarlet Letter, and The Third Nephite, but it re-occurs to me that the attempt to make sense of what is can't be understood is what drives the mystery/thriller genre, what makes a well-wrought mystery something much more than a puzzle about who did what. The real puzzle in a mystery is the mystery of righteousness and the mystery of iniquity. Indeed, some mysteries don't even bother to uncloak the killer in dramatic Hercule Poirot fashion. Chester Himes' The Real Cool Killers has several solutions, and Louis Owens' The Sharpest Sight never tells who the killer is--unless you're listening carefully to what one character says. Yet both are satisying mysteries observing the conventions of the genre. Himes' story has several endings because he's exploring how complex murder is, and how it can haunt you even if you murder for a very good reason. (Isn't there a story like that early in the Book of Mormon?) Owens never tells us the murderer for a similar reason. In a good mystery the villain and hero are close moral doubles and have to have a verbal showdown, a chance to demonstrate in words their commitment to righteousness or iniquity. The Sharpest Sight has two detectives, Cole McCurtain, searching for his brother's bones so he can bury them, and Mundo Morales, searching for Attis's killer. Both characters have a close moral double and both have the verbal encounter. Cole's is not with evil, but rather with a life out of kilter. (Owens expands this theme in Bone Game, where Cole, now 20 years older, struggles against a power that wants to dice for the world's soul.) Mundo's struggle with his double doesn't go as well. His double, the man who embodies the mystery of iniquity ("Have you ever read Jonathan Edwards? He was the one who awakened me to my true potential for evil.")--well I won't say anything more about that encounter except that the hero is supposed to vanquish the villain, thus setting things right, but neither Mundo nor Cole is able to. Cole's father, Hoey is, however. He resolves the first situation through a tremendously moving act of compassion and forgiveness, and the second through...no, you'll have to read it. Back for a moment to stories about religious hypocrites. It's easy to assume an author is writing about religious hypocrisy because he or she believes religious people are hypocrites. The sense I got from high school discussions of The Scarlet Letter, and college discussions of stories like "Young Goodman Brown" is that Hawthorne rejected the Puritans as hypocrites and didn't think of himself as religious. It wasn't until I read Eugene England's essay "On not accepting Spectral Evidence" (is that the title? it's the piece he wrote after his outburst at Sunstone about the Strengthening the Members Committee) and some others where he mentions Hawthorne that I understood Dimmesdale hardly represents all preachers or all Puritans for Hawthorne--though he may represent Hawthorne's ambivalence about his Puritan background. With Dimmesdale and Chillingworth Hawthorne wants to tell us something about how hypocrisy destroys the hypocrite, and how unforgiveness destroys the unforgiver even as the person they both betray is saved by refusing to hide her sin. Boy, this is a long brief comment, and I'm still not at the end. I started the comment because I want to suggest that for LDS writers one fruitful thing to explore is revelation as an act of grace rather than a consequence of righteousness. Levi Peterson does that in The Third Nephite. I'm not sure Levi wants us to believe the scrofulous hitchhiker Simpson really is a Nephite (maybe he is--look at the ending), but I'm quite sure that when Simpson says, "The Lord sent me this way to kick you out of your orbit around that perstiferous, piratical Connor Stuart," he's telling the truth. Otis's soul is precious and the Lord wants to save him, even though he's hell-bent for most of the story. (As a sidelight, when I first read The Third Nephite I thought of Flannery O'Connor's Good Country People, and for BYU's Flannery O'Connor 70th Anniversary Symposium I wrote a paper comparing the two.) Ok, now that the long riff on Kathy's concerns about the perils of talking about your own revelations is done, let me talk briefly about her description of her revelation. The account reminds me of some things Reynolds Price says in A Palpable God, his 1978 collection of Biblical translations. He begins with a long essay, "A Single Meaning: Notes on the Origins and Life of Narrative," explaining why he believes the stories he's translating are faithful accounts of historical people's lives. One reason involves the declarative nature of Bible stories. The narrators don't argue for the stories, they just tell them and you either believe or not. He sees that as supreme narrative confidence. Another reason has to do with the compression of the stories, the simplicity. Generations of retelling have worn away the extraneous details. Price says the goal of any storyteller is to achieve this narrative confidence that brings us into helpless belief. I think Kathy's account has a good measure of that narrative confidence. This passage particularly moves me: "Before that for years I had questioned and agonized and shaken my fist at heaven because of the total lack of sure guidance in the world, and what I felt was abandonement by God -- if he ever had existed, I felt that he had turned his back on us down here." I have long felt that a skilled Mormon writer could write something as dark as any existentialist, with the difference that light bursts in at the end. Several of the stories in Gene England's anthology Converted to Christ Through the Book of Mormon carry a similar sense to Kathy's of the bleakness and hopelessness of life, and how the Savior and the BofM dispelled them. I think we need some well-written literary novels that show the Gospel as answer to life's most difficult problems. We have plenty of fiction that looks around the issue. Jack Weyland deals with a lot of difficult problems, but he doesn't go into the depths of the problems. _Sara, Whenever I Hear Your Name_ is an interesting picture of a girl pregnant by her stepfather, but it's an external portrait, you never really see into Sara's mind. I'd like to see an LDS novel where the agonizing and fist shaking at heaven is not a straw woman, but something integral and serious in the plot, and finally answered by something like the revelation described above. There would likely have to be some good foreshadowing, so that images and phrases from earlier echo within the revelation. Properly foreshadowed and modified slightly to a fictional form, Kathy's account could make as rich and satisfying an ending to a novel as the last 20 pages of Walker Percy's The Second Coming, where Will Barrett tries to find God through serving others, and finally finds him in the person of an old Catholic priest in a nursing home. One other comment. Louis Owens has some important things to teach about how to portray spiritual events. There's this wondrous moment in _Bone Game_ that doesn't have much to do with the plot, but tells a great deal about Hoey McCurtain and his close to 100 year old uncle Luther, and tells us what Owens thinks we need in the world. Another Grandfather tells Hoey and Luther to go to a particular place and wait. What they find is some witches who have kidnapped a young woman. (Witches in this context means men who use their shamanistic powers for evil.) They are able to rescue her and deliver her safely back to her family. _Bone Game_ carries a rich sense that compassion, kindness and forgiveness will do what violence and confrontation can't, that is, save us. And the person Owens invokes to represent that compassionate spirit is Jesus. Astonishing novel. Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JLTyner Subject: Re: [AML] Polygamy Hymns Update Date: 28 Aug 2002 22:50:13 -0700 Ditto Ed. I don't know if this qualifies as a polygamy hymn, but Michael Ballam sang at a Women's Conference I attended about seven years ago and he choose a lovely little ditty called, "O'Gorman Is A Mormon Now". It told the story of a fellow who loved the polygamy thing until all those children started to arrive and then he was stuck. Michael said some New York neighbors had found the sheet music among their grandfather's papers and thought he should have it. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA Ed Snow wrote: >Thanks to Kathy and Morgan for their input on this deep and profound >topic. I think it's worthy of a Master's Thesis and possibly Federal >funding. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] BYU Education Week Event Date: 29 Aug 2002 07:50:12 -0600 (MDT) Ronald Bartholomew, a seminary teacher and > an apparently popular youth speaker, gave a presentation on Monday. A > sample: > > football players who brought their compact discs, which did not invite > the Spirit, to seminary. > > The seminary class watched the young men destroy the CDs with a > sledgehammer, then sweep the pieces into a shoebox. The young men gave > the box to Bartholomew, their teacher. They asked him to give the box to > God.> > > Jacob Proffitt > Snipping of the rest, how is this any different that Christ's NT teachings "If thy eye offend thee, pluck it out" and similar quotes. I have had times when I have had to get rid of a CD or a book I felt was not personally enriching me. I think its a good principle, as long as specific CDs aren't condemned. If he just condemns "CDs that don't invite the spirit" he's made it general enough to allow each person to make their own decision. Sounds to me more like making NT teachings relevant to modern times, not groupthink. --ivan wolfe -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rich Hammett Subject: [AML] Edited Movies Article Date: 29 Aug 2002 09:31:30 -0500 (CDT) >From Wired online magazine: http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,54759,00.html It's another article about proposed lawsuits against companies that either resell cleaned-up versions of movies, or sell products to automatically do this for a viewer. rich -- \ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett / rhammett@HiWAAY.net "Better the pride that resides / in a citizen of the world; \ than the pride that divides / when a colorful rag is unfurled." -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathrynlane@cs.com Subject: Re: [AML] Lousy Movies Date: 29 Aug 2002 10:35:01 EDT Those movies still live on as "Mystery Science Theater." (I think I have the= =20 name right.) It's a TV series where a man and two robots are marooned=20 somewhere with a huge pile of "B" movies and they pass the time viewing them= =20 and making wisecracks. It's a huge hit with all the Laurels in my Ward=20 including my daughter. I think your right that the drive-in was the key. = =20 You have to have a friendly group to make comments about a move while it's= =20 running and when you're in a car at the drive-in with your friends others=20 can't be offended or tell you to shut up. Once our family (includes several= =20 adult children as well as a few in grade school) found ourselves the only=20 people in a theater for the screening of "Walk in the Clouds." We spread out= =20 and made rude comments the entire time and it's still cited as one of our=20 favorite movie outings. Maybe film makers can't see that what we want most= of=20 all is fun because movies are so expensive to make. Maybe we are too=20 sophisticated to admit that sometimes we just want fun time with our friends= =20 and/or family not a life changing cinematic experience. Cathryn Lane=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rich Hammett Subject: [AML] "Profane" Settings for Religious Thought Date: 29 Aug 2002 09:43:50 -0500 (CDT) This is an article that a friend sent out (the link) on the Finnish Missionary e-mail list. > Ron Simpson takes Meridian readers on a musical journey to Finland. > > > http://www.ldsmag.com/music/020827strange.html Interesting article. I also liked to travel around Finland and photograph (or buy the postcards that the missionary societies usually sell) the old churches. This author takes an awfully narrow position about music, though. He seems to be quite shocked at a hymn text being used in a pop song, "By the Waters of Babylon" over acoustic pop. This question seems particularly odd: "Does it ever do any good to present religious thought in a profane setting?" He also wonders if there can ever be an end to that debate. My question: Is there actually such a debate still raging on the Wasatch Front? This wouldn't have surprised me so much (I get most of my Utah news via the Sugarbeet) , except that he teaches in the School of Music at BYU. To my jaded ears, it sounds remarkably provincial and of short perspective to define so (apparently) narrowly "profane". If you have a response, but don't think it's topical for AML-List, feel free to e-mail me personally. Thanks! rich -- \ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett / rhammett@HiWAAY.net "Better the pride that resides / in a citizen of the world; \ than the pride that divides / when a colorful rag is unfurled." ============================================================================ To Remove yourself from the Finnish Mission Alumni Forum Mailing list send an email message to Majordomo@InnerNET.ORG, and in the BODY of the message put: unsubscribe fma-forum For help on this list: mail to ed.rogers@innernet.org - Kiitos! ============================================================================ -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Books for Newspaper Reporter Date: 29 Aug 2002 10:57:18 -0600 Mormon missionary folklore website: http://php.indiana.edu/~dostlund/mission.htm Nonfiction books: Clawson, Kevan, Becoming a Great Missionary Durrant, Becoming the Bold Missionary Hughes, Dean, We'll Bring the World His Truth Pinegar, Ed J., The Ultimate Missionary Companion Shepherd, Mormon Passage: A Missionary Chronicle Sunshine for the Latter-day Saint Missionary Soul Taylor, Jon, The Network Marketing Game [just kidding] Whetten, John D., Making the Most of Your Mission Fiction: Allred, The Companion Bingham, 101 Missionary Stories Nelson, Lee, A Thousand Souls Petsco, Bela, Nothing Very Important and Other Stories Thomas, Ralph, Everything You Need to Know about a Mission Anderson, Paris, Waiting for the Flash Bennion, John, Falling Toward Heaven Farmer, Gladys, Elders and Sisters Fisher, Bones Gagon, David, Honorable Release Hall, Cory Davidson Mitchell, Alan Rex, Angel of the Danube Parkinson, Benson, The MTC: Set Apart Parkinson, Benson, Into the Field >From an earlier AML-List post: Following is a weakly annotated bibliography of what's in my personal Mormon missionary collection. I'm going to post this to AML-List to see if people can help flesh it out at all. (I maintain the collection as background material for my own writing about missionaries--I'm still dabbling with my own missionary memoir 7-8 hours per week.) Let me know if you have anything else or any insights on any of these. Anything major missing? Allred, Gordon T., The Companion, Bookcraft, 1992, 222 pgs Fiction about a dad serving alongside his son, likely nauseatingly didactic. I haven't read it yet. Anderson, Paris, Waiting for the Flash, Scotlin Company, 1988, 133 pgs A fictionalized missionary journal. Lots of internal strife, some conflict with the missionary mindset. Bennion, John, Falling Toward Heaven, Signature Books, 2000 The first third of this novel takes place during the last few months of the narrator's mission, with some interesting characterization of companion and mission president and some unsettled feelings in the narrator. Bingham, Mike, 101 Missionary Stories You Won't Read in The Ensign, Slickrock Books, 1998, 96 pgs Humorous anecdotes from Robert Kirby's press. I haven't read it yet. Bott, Randy L., Prepare with Honor: Helps for Future Missionaries, Deseret Book, 1995, 111 pgs Obviously didactic. I haven't read it yet but bought it to get a flavor of issues on the table. Bytheway, John, What I Wish I'd Known Before My Mission, Deseret Book, 1996, 122 pgs Obviously didactic. I plan to mine it for anecdotes and issues. Cornwall, Marie, et al (eds), Contemporary Mormonism, University of Illinois Press "Part 3: The Mormon Missionary Experience" includes the following chapters: Shepherd, Gordon and Gary, "Sustaining a Lay Religion in Modern Society: The Mormon Missionary Experience" Parry, Keith, "The Mormon Missionary Companionship" Wilson, William A, "Powers of Heaven and Hell: Mormon Missionary Narratives as Instruments of Socialization and Social Control Knowlton, David, "'Gringo, Jeringo': Anglo Mormon Missionary Culture in Bolivia (I haven't read any of these yet.) Eaton, Robert I., Thrust in Your Sickle, But Watch Your Fingers, Horizon Publishers, 1998, 190 pgs Novel in a faithful mode with possible funny or revealing anecdotes. I haven't read it yet. Farmer, Gladys, Elders and Sisters, Seagull Books, 1977, 162 pgs I read this a long time ago. I think it's connected short stories laced with some realism and skepticism. Gagon, David, Honorable Release, Signature Books, 1992, 246 pgs Kind of a potboiler plot about a murderer loose among missionaries, if I remember right. It's been too long since I read it. Hall, Randall L., Cory Davidson, Thomson Productions, 1984, 188 pgs Novel about a missionary committing fornication and going AWOL, then finding redemption. Not too literarily accomplished. Hughes, Dean, and Hughes, Tom, We'll Bring the World His Truth, Deseret Book, 1995, 97 pgs Airbrushed, faith-promoting missionary anecdotes from around the world, many of them historical rather than contemporary. Melonakos, C.M., Tracting Made Easy, 1991 Haven't read it yet. Might yield interesting insights into the tracting burden. Mitchell, Alan Rex, Angel of the Danube, Bonneville Books, 2000, 197 pgs An lively, unusual novel about the last few months of a mission in Austria and first few weeks home. Some realism and humor woven in, bears down in testimony from time to time. Ostland, D. Glenn, Mormon Missionary Folklore Virtual Web Archive, http://php.indiana.edu/~dostlund/newpage.htm Lots of good stories collected here that I'm just beginning to read. Ostling, Richard N. and Ostling, Joan K., Mormon America, HarperSanFrancisco, 1999 Chapter on missionaries titled "Two by Two" I read it awhile ago and don't remember specifics. Palfreyman, Ross H., Two Years in God's Mormon Army, Shumway Publishing Company, 1998, 205 pgs A conversational account of a Thailand missionary experience. Not professionally accomplished, but readable and somewhat insightful about missionary life. A little questioning and facing of challenges, but mostly cheerful adventuring. Parkinson, Benson, The MTC: Set Apart, Aspen Books, 1995, 295 pgs Parkinson, Benson, Into the Field, Aspen Books, 2000, 226 pgs Two of the most accomplished missionary novels, with lots of deep characterization and realistic but ultimately faith-promoting facing up to missionary challenges. Petsco, Bela, Nothing Very Important and Other Stories, Meservydale Publishing Company, 1979, 209 pgs It's been too long since I read these interlinked missionary stories to comment much, but I think there's some juicy, earthy human stuff mixed in with glimpses of faith. Pinegar, Ed J., The Ultimate Missionary Companion, Covenant Communications, 2001, 171 pgs Another didactic work to mine for issues. Raleigh, Robert, In Our Lovely Deseret: Mormon Fictions, Signature Books, 1998. Includes at least two short stories about missionaries, both with gay themes, if I remember right: Townsend, Johnny, "Almond Milk" Gullino, Derek, "Sleuths" Shepherd, Gary, and Shepherd, Gordon, Mormon Passage: A Missionary Chronicle, University of Illinois Press, 1998, 454 pgs Presents parts of these two brothers' missionary journals and analyzes how missionaries are socialized. Somewhat academic in approach. I've only skimmed it. Skousen, Jeffrey G., All I Ever Needed to Know I Learned on My Mission, Bonneville Books, 2001, 94 pgs Didactic but perhaps some anecdotes can be stripped out. Thomas, Ralph, Everything You Need to Know About a Mission (cartoons), Repent! Publishing, 1997 Kind of like a graphic novel, but amateurish looking. I haven't read it thoroughly. Wilson, William A., On Being Human: The Folklore of Mormon Missionaries (pamphlet), Utah State University, 1981, 24 pgs Some good insights and stories. [I was also recently gifted with complete collections of both Dialogue and Sunstone, and I intend to go through all those eventually, trawling for missionary stories and articles. Any headstart on that would be appreciated.] Chris Bigelow -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: [AML] Jeff CALL, _Mormonville_ Date: 29 Aug 2002 11:16:50 -0700 Jeff Needle wrote: "What is "Mormonville"??? Did I miss that discussion?" I've been searching for MORMONVILLE since February or March, whenever the last AML conference was, and I heard it discussed there and on this list as perhaps the new definitive LDS novel. I couldn't find it anywhere, now I realize it was because it wasn't published yet. I went to Deseret Book in Bountiful (Utah) and requested a copy, only to be told they weren't on the list of stores scheduled to receive the book. (What? Out of all the Deseret Books stores, only Bountiful and Boise Idaho weren't going to get the book--is that because illiterate goons lives in those communities? I think not...first red flag to go up.) I then requested 10 copies to be ordered for my book group (I want them to read it as the Oct selection, which means we will need it by the 4th Wed in Sept). I was told their store policy is I'd have to prepay for the special order--EXCUSE ME! AT $18.95 A POP?!?! (second red flag)--I can't afford that. I told them if they didn't want the group to get their books from them, we'd go somewhere else. I was told the policy is in effect because book groups often order books and then don't come and get them. It didn't surprise me, as recently several members of my book group were trying to order copies of Virginia Sorensen's WHERE NOTHING IS LONG AGO, and they were told by Bountiful's Deseret Book it would take 3 - 4 weeks. They went up the road to Carr Stationary, ordered it and had the book THE NEXT DAY. Now what's up with that? (Third red flag.) The staffer told me the store manager was in Hawaii and is supposed to be back next Monday and arranged to have that person call me to see if they'd ok ordering the books without prepayment. I am amazed at the bureaucratic incompetence and lack of literate knowledge shown by the staff of that store. Do you think it has something to do with slow corporate movement by a large institutionally controlled company that can't respond quickly to local needs? Hmmm... In the meantime, I still look around, trying to find MORMONVILLE at bookstores and libraries, but no success yet. Let me know if you fare better in your part of the world, Jeff, than I have in Utah... Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 29 Aug 2002 12:06:07 -0600 Thom has taken some heat for his allegation that Levi Peterson's portrayal of the Church in _The Backslider_ is "truer" than Lund's portrayal of our early history in _The Work and the Glory,_ but he also asked some other questions. > As long as those folks don't read any real Church history, their testimonies > should remain unassailed. But what would we rather have, people who are > converted to the Church the way it really is (Levi Peterson), or the way > that Lund creates it? The problem with the latter is that you run the risk > of your converts turning out like me -- frustrated and somewhat angry when > they find out that Church leaders were much more human than they wsere > initially portrayed to be, or that the Church has tried to re-write its > official history. The original question of this thread was which Church histories we would recommend to someone who wanted to learn about Mormons. But our digression into Peterson vs. Lund illustrates a good point--we know that works of history often offer a slant or try to prove an underlying point, so how does one determine for themselves either the authenticity of a work or its slant? Are there any good, neutral histories to go along with those that are trying to either prove or disprove the Church's divine origins? Is a neutral history even possible in light of the extraordinary nature of our foundation? In other words, what constitutes "real" Church history? And how many of the eccentricities of our early (or modern) leadership are we required to expose in order to answer a curious query honestly? What is our responsibilities as members to expose (or hide) such facts? How much is up to the seeker to search out a wider variety of works? Are any resources available to sort and sift the works that are out there? I'm not a real fan of historical fiction because I don't know how to sort fact from fiction short of reading primary historical sources, and there's enough disagreement about the quality of those sources that it begs the value of reading an abstraction of an intrepretation of history. Why not skip the fiction and go straight to the works of alleged historical fact? Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] BYU Education Week Event Date: 29 Aug 2002 14:03:04 -0400 Jacob Proffitt wrote: > ...I think we'd be better off without him at Education Week--his actions > tempt me to rechristen it Indoctrination Week (or Re-Education Week...). > I can almost hear their brains atrophying in those quotes... Although I edited liberally, I propose a heartfelt AMEN to everything Jacob said in his post. When I read the original blurb of this article in LDS Blipvirps (ten points to anyone who can footnote that allusion) I was sickened. Thanks to Jacob for reminding me that I'm not alone. Tony Markham -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] BYU Education Week Event Date: 29 Aug 2002 13:54:03 -0500 At 08:03 PM 8/28/02, you wrote: >Oh, and I've always found it interesting as an LDS cultural phenomenon >who we choose to incinerate--how many Backstreet Boys CDs survived the >carnage when I consider them far worse spiritually than Metallica. >Which is evidence of my subjective personal judgement, really :). > >Jacob Proffitt Hm. I'll admit, that's creepy. I'd have been the one pitching Afterglow CD's. (On further thought, doing that may have helped the situation a good deal...) :-p Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Teaching Literary Devices Etc. Date: 29 Aug 2002 14:50:56 -0500 Wow. Burns never did anything for ME, either (sorry Burns fans--if you remember, I'm the one who didn't like Jane Austen either--). Poor kid. I really enjoyed _Song of Solomon_ by Toni Morisson. I'm still working through her entire canon, and for the record I wanted the ending of that one to go on at least another page or so (you might want to read it first before giving it to him, to see what I mean), but the characters jumped off the pages, living and breathing. I was _there._ _Beloved_ was a harder read for me, meaning far more painful (wow: but it's excellent), but some of the surreal (or is it called magic realism?) parts were difficult for me to figure out what I was actually to believe was happening. In case that sentence made *no* sense... one of the characters is possibly? is? a ghost, or maybe she isn't. I never could make up my mind. _The Color Purple_ by Alice Walker is so frequently recommended, I'm afraid it could be cliche, but it's fascinating too. Celie's narrative is in her simple, uneducated dialect and is easy to read. The literary style, switching occasionally from the dialect voice to letters from other characters, is very interesting. I'm trying to think of male writers and coming up a bit dry. I love Langston Hughes too. _Invisible Man_ by Ralph Ellison is a classic, but the reading level might be too difficult. (I'm not sure where his reading level is.) It's slow in a lot of parts, and while socially relevant and literary, won't be an easy read for him to cut his teeth on. It took me an incredibly long time to get through it myself. I can think of more movies than books, actually. Would reading screenplays interest him at all? Sometimes they can be found in the library or on the Internet. I'm coming up short on authors writing for young adult audiences. That leads me to wonder whether not much is being written, or whether I haven't discovered it yet. It could be a lack of promotion (though sadly, I doubt that's it), but come to think of it, I _haven't_ seen a series or even a particular author targeted directly for African-American youth. I look for that sort of thing when I'm at the library. There *are* many children's books with that focus. Norton publishes an anthology of African-American writers. It's on my wish list, so I haven't pored through it yet, but it might be a good starting point. There's got to be good anthologies of African folktales out there also, that shouldn't be overly challenging. I haven't done as much Hispanic study, but I really enjoyed a little novel called _Like Water for Chocolate._ The book, NOT the movie. It's a story that a film medium simply can't do any justice to. Each chapter begins with a recipe. The action of the chapter blends in some way with that recipe. That doesn't--can't--translate into film well at all. If _Beloved_ is a little bit magic realism, this book can define the genre. It's easy to read, not long, and drenched in Mexican culture of the early 1900's, with vivid, unforgettable characters. I'm guessing one key he needs is accessibility. All the above I listed (except _Invisible Man_) are easily accessible and understandable. Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: [AML] Text as Authority Date: 29 Aug 2002 14:52:27 -0600 Amelia Parkin wrote: > Let me try to explain this a bit. When I first began reading Scott's post, > I was pretty disgusted with the statement about the civil rights movement > and communism and the fact that it seemed that Scott was defending it. I would like for Thom to offer the source for the civil rights/communist plot statement so we can have a text to analyze. Right now I'm granting the point that a GA said it, because I know of at least one politically active GA who made a lot of fairly inflammatory partisan political statements while he served in a cabinet position in the U.S. government. I accept it as entirely possible this GA made such a statement. What I don't know is either the immediate or general context of the statement, the intended audience, and whether the statement was later offered as doctrine by the Church or was reprinted in an official publication of the Church (thus lending it authority as doctrine). As such, it becomes hard to discuss except in the most broad conceptual terms. > The problem is > that although I can say "I disagree with General Authority X when he stated > that..." it becomes a completely different beast when that statement is > embodied in text. That's what happens with the written word--text grants a > statement more authority than when it existed only as a spoken statement. > So as soon as we record the statements of a general authority in the Ensign, > for instance, it becomes more difficult to repudiate that statement, even in > our own minds. I can't argue with that. We're told that the Ensign is a sort of adjunct scripture, a recording of the wisdom of modern prophets, such that the words that appear in the Ensign do carry more weight of authority. Which is part of why I'd like Thom to produce his reference, because if the unnamed GA's words weren't offered as pseudo-scripture in an official publication of the Church, I think the GA's base opinions are completely arguable. More importantly, the anecdote was offered in an effort to support the idea that the institutional Church was aggressively racist, and I'm not sure that's a fair characterization based on the other words offered by the general authorities of the Church at the time. While the Church defended the policy on the basis of scriptures we have now come to understand differently, the broad message delivered by the general authorities was one of love, charity, and compassion regardless of race or national origin. Even during WWII the Church leaders were either silent on the intense racial animus shown to people of Japanese origin, or they preached tolerance and charity. It just seems less like institutional hate and more like an attempt to do the right thing as they understood it. More on the inherent authority of texts toward the end of this post... > And when the attitude underlying a statement is given even > more authority by being translated into a text book--a supposedly objective > textbook--then we're really entering dangerous territory. And at that > point, I begin to hold the church as an institution responsible. The > American Heritage textbook is written by a BYU professor, published by BYU, > and all BYU students are required to read it and study it. Not only that, > the question I talked about in my previous post shows up in a practice test. I was lucky, I guess. I managed to test out of the class and was never subjected to either the textbook or the professor's opinion on the matter, so I can't argue the text or its interpretation. I would like to believe that I would have argued that particular point (I would now), but I'll never know. In any case, the author of the textbook clearly stepped beyond the bounds of objectivity on that particular instance and failed both himself and his students, IMO. But this raises another question: What is the relationship between the course offerings at BYU and the doctrinal stances of the Church? Is the curriculum of BYU designed to be an extension of LDS doctrine, and are all ideas and resources used in BYU classes supposed to be taken as the approved stances of the sponsoring organization (aka, the Church)? I don't argue that many people *do* accept the authority of BYU classes and professors as being divinely supported, but I wonder if we *should* accept such authority--and whether the university claims such authority. A university encompasses so many paradoxes and essential disagreements that I have a hard time extending that authority beyond the individual professors (and perhaps their department heads) because a school and a church seek different fundamental goals. Heaven knows that there's no agreement at all on how to analyze texts by either living or dead authors--or at least no agreement on how to interpret those texts. Even BYU's English and Humanities and History departments have deep schisms of approach and authority. So is it fair to accept the words of either a professor or a text used in a college class as the authoritative doctrinal stances of the Church that sponsors the university? I'm not sure it is, though I don't dispute that it happens. A lot. Similarly, does the professor (or the university) expect students to accept these kinds of value judgments as authoritative? I understand that it was a practice test, but I also understand that had it counted each and every student had a right to challenge the validity of the question and the accuracy of the expected answer. It seems to me that my first year at BYU was dominated by repeated pleas to think critically, to question and study and reach my own understanding. When I questioned assumptions with an intent to understand an issue better I don't recall ever being punished for merely asking/doubting. > So not only does it have the authority of a text but it has the added > authority of correctness on a test. Now I can dismiss that. A lot of > people can dismiss that. But not everyone can. And even if it is > dismissed, the church is still the institution behind the statement. And > the statement is not charitable when considering others' motives and > intentions. Nor is it a statement that focuses attention on our own motives > but rather focuses a critical destructive attention on the protestors of the > Vietnam war. That's what an American Heritage text has to do with this. My > problem is with the fact that a book sponsored by an institution proposed > something so objectionable. I think the author, professor, and department all blew the call on that one. Of course I also wonder how many students failed to raise an objection to the validity of the concept to their professors--either out of deference to their authority, or out of fear for repercussions. And I wonder whether that one failure of judgment automatically casts the remainder of their teachings or ideas in doubt--and whether that doubt should extend to question the validity of the Church as sponsoring organization. I know that as a freshman coming to Utah and BYU from out of state that I tended to bestow unnatural authority on both BYU professors, and on Utahns in general. This was Zion, after all, and the Lord's university. I'm lucky to have had good teachers and a suspicious nature, and I found that by my second year I was more than willing to challenge any conclusion whose origin I didn't understand, and to reserve judgment on a lot of issues until I had more information. I also learned that I just plain disagreed with people who I deeply respected--something I only recently learned to be comfortable with. But how much of that is our own very Mormon respect for authority, and how much is expected or demanded by the faculty? As Mormons we do grant authority relatively easily to people whose only claim to that authority is that they were called and set apart. Do we grant BYU professors a greater authority than they've earned because the school is owned by the Church? Should we? I'm not sure we should. Most of what a BYU professor says doesn't end up in the Ensign, though. And not every professor is either LDS or working from an assumption that what they teach should be viewed as either social or religious doctrine of the Church. Even then we're instructed to prove all things for ourselves. It may be an artificial distinction, but even the scriptures are true only insofar as they are translated (and interpretted; aka, translated from textual symbol to idea) correctly. That casts all individual texts into doubt for me. It's in my personal correlation of many texts that I hope to eventually learn some truth. Not that many years ago it was possible to get textbooks that made all kinds of moral judgments. Those texts were suspect then, and they remain suspect now. That someone approved them as a tool of instruction doesn't make them authoritative, regardless of who wrote it, who published it, and what university used them in its classes. So... I don't argue that many people accept published text as inherently more authoritative. I just argue whether we should, and if so what proofs we should require. Discovering truth has never been easy, and in the modern internet age the signal to noise ratio favors noise by a substantial margin. That may be the greatest challenge of our generation--to find truth amidst the vast clamor of competing doctrines. > Hope that all makes sense. And I hope it's clear why I think this is > pertinent to a discussion of Mormon letters. I think it's a fundamental issue in any discussion of Mormon letters. Literature critics argue the authority of the text itself relative to the readers' own experiences, and pretty much everyone argues the right of the author to his or her opinions. Thom Duncan and I currently disagree as to whether Levi Peterson's texts are more authoritative in illustrating fundamental truth about the Church than Gerald Lund's. If we never come to agreement, so what? It would be wonderful if BYU only taught perfectly true concepts, but I don't think it's reasonable of us to expect that. It would be wonderful if general authorities only taught perfectly true contexts, but I'm not sure it's reasonable to expect that, either. Yes, we feel especially hurt when a trusted authority offers as true ideas we believe to be false. But it was always our responsibility to prove those ideas for ourselves, and the vast majority of the things that we learn to mistrust each other over just don't matter. We have a real problem in the Church with accepting works published by BYU, Deseret Book, FARMS, and even Covenant Communications as authoritative, when the vast majority of that work is provisional at best and reflects nothing more or less than the ideas and beliefs of the authors. We want authoritative pronouncements because they free us of individual responsibility to find the truth and apply it in our own lives. That we invest them with divine authority seems like a problem for the readers more so than the authors. And where the author claims divine authority, the issue becomes very difficult indeed. I suppose that's part of the grand test of this life--a completely unsatisfying answer, but the best I can come up with today. Until then, I give very few texts the weight of absolute authority. And even in the case of the scriptures, the words spoken at general conference, or the articles published in the Ensign I study, pray, and come to my own confirmation of fundamental truths. And I hold no one but myself accountable for the understanding I derive from those texts. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Lousy Movies Date: 29 Aug 2002 16:17:57 -0600 Tracie wrote: >I wonder if it really matters whether a film is intentionally bad, or=20 >just bad by accident. I know a lot of people, including my kids, = would=20 >not label SWII "bad", but it seems to fit in at, at least, Eric's=20 >description. Actually, I think it does matter. The American International movies = weren't intentionally bad, I guess, but they were driven by an aesthetic = that made them bad. Whereas a lot of contemporary bad movies aren't much = fun, just painful. Glitter, my favorite bad movie of the past few years, = was deliciously terrible, but I understand Freddie Got Fingered was just = unwatchable. I would add that, while bad movies can often be sorta fun, bad plays are = impossible to sit through. I think it's the live-ness of it. Those are = real people up there trying their durndest; it feels uncharitable to = laugh, and yet, my gosh, will this evening ever end! >BTW Eric, we still have drive-ins in Ohio. But they show all the same=20 >movies that are in the theaters. =20 We don't in my area, but if we did, that's what they'd do too. >I haven't been, so I wonder, if you=20 >sat in a car with a crowd of teen-agers, would they being having the=20 >same kind of fun with these films that you had with the AI of the=20 >past? =20 Good question. Hard to say. >Is it the drive-ins that are gone, or the made-for-drive-in=20 >movies? Chicken or the egg? I think they both died together. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] _Possession_ (Movie) Date: 29 Aug 2002 10:19:51 -0600 At 07:44 PM 8/27/02 -0600, you wrote: >After it finishes its mainstream run it'll probably end up at >Brewvies where you can order a sweet pizza and watch the film on a couch. I've never heard of Brewvies -- sounds like a beer place! You watch movies from a couch while you eat? Sounds decadent! Sounds like the average American living room! I was irritated that Gosford Park came only to SLC and not to Provo, but when I saw it I found it sloooooow, even though it was interesting in the way it avoided meeting one's expectations. Barbara R. Hume Provo, Utah -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Church History Recommendations? Date: 29 Aug 2002 10:55:58 -0600 Jeff, MORMONVILLE is a book that is just out, and so hot off the press that nobody has had a chance to look at it yet. It's written by Jeff Call, a writer for Deseret News, and THE PERFECT mainstream LDS lit. book. It's not high brow lit, but it's really good. It's a book that could be written only once, and this is it! I'm glad Jeff did such a good job. My committee for the novel award gave it $1000 last March. Enjoy! Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Marilyn Brown Books Date: 29 Aug 2002 11:04:11 -0600 Jeff Needle finds two Marilyn Brown purchases at the DI! Aha, Jeff! I'm not sure whether to take this as a compliment or not, (I'm now in the slush pile) but I think I'll choose to do just that! I can remembering feeling like a winner of bingo finding Margaret Blair Young's SALVADOR in a DI stack! You are the all-time reader of all time I would choose to make such a find (and actually buy)! Hope you like the reading. Remember, THE EARTHKEEPERS was my first and 25 years go. If you have some suggestions, I'd love them, for I'm coming out with a paperback in 2004. We didn't even have computers then, so I'm going to have to retype the whole thing to a disk. I will be changing and cutting. So give me your honest opinions! They are welcome! And thanks for the publicity! Marilyn Brown -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Books for Newspaper Reporter (Comp 1) Date: 30 Aug 2002 08:44:52 -0500 [MOD: This is a compilation post.] >From kcmadsen@utah-inter.net Thu Aug 29 10:57:55 2002 Preston passed on this request from a news reporter: "I'm just wondering if you have any recommendations (as in more websites and books) for understanding a) the religion b) how effective the missionaries are and c) how they manage to be so well organized and what has compelled them to be so organized. Things like that." We've talked about a lot of books in the past few days that help explain our religion and culture to non-members, investigators and recent converts, so I've no new suggestion in that arena. But I think a book that would add insight to b) & c) is THE ULTIMATE MISSIONARY COMPANION by Ed J. Pinegar. As it's addressed to prospective and current missionaries as its audience, it would be a "fly on the wall" look for this reporter to see how committed missionaries prepare themselves and what they think is important to be successful in preaching the gospel. It's published by Covenant Communications, ISBN 1-57764-830-3. Kim Madsen >From alan@trilobyte.net Wed Aug 28 21:49:03 2002 Angel of the Danube, of course. Check amazon.com Alan Mitchell >From RichardDutcher@aol.com Thu Aug 29 09:51:29 2002 Surely someone's going to recommend the movie "God's Army"... I've seen it a few times and I believe it is a fairly positive and accurate depiction of missionary life. Richard Dutcher -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature