From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #31 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Friday, May 5 2000 Volume 01 : Number 031 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:26:56 -0600 From: Tom Matkin Subject: [AML] mormon poets list Dear Benson, Please consider posting this message as an invitation to members of your list to join a new list which I have set up for Mormon Poets. I know this sounds a little pretentious. Anyone who calls himself a poet is automatically assumed to be either pretentious or crazy, or both, but I've done it so draw your own conclusions. The idea is that this is a place to post poetic offerings, to discuss them, and to establish a virtual community of like minded people who enjoy reading or writing poetry. It is monitored in the sense that certain rules will apply and those who don't have success obeying the rules could be removed from the list. The rules are as follows: Couple of don'ts. 1.Criticism of a poet will not be tolerated. You can point out what you see as flaws in a poem. But you cross the line when you do something like "I don't agree with your message in that poem, you must be a dope. I think you are dishonest and high handed in your approach. Grow up and try again." That will earn you a gold star and strike you off the list. 2. Limericks are fun, post all you like, but make sure they, and any other poems, are not dirty or sleazy. I want my mother to be able to read this list. If she can't read your stuff you won't be around for long. 3. This list is about Mormon Poets. Not anti Mormon poets. If you are one of the latter go start your own list. Criticism of the Church, its leaders or doctrines will not be tolerated. 4. This is to be a safe and happy place. If you must be critical and mean spirited you will get a warning or two but in the end, you won't be with us. Those are the don'ts. Here are the dos. Do share your own poetry. You keep the copyright, keeping in mind that poetry has a market value somewhere between slim and none. Do share your thoughts about others poems. Don't be afraid to give Attaboys. Add something if you can. But even a simple Attaboy might cheer someone along. When we post we are often anxious for some feed back. Please give it. Do share your thoughts about what's up in your life. Don't be afraid to banter, tease, exult, cry out, and grieve here. I started this list to provide an environment where those favouring the LDS point of view and sustaining and supporting the leaders and doctrines of the Church could gather to celebrate that and anything else that was important in their lives. The idea was that those who have a penchant for or appreciation of poetry should have a place to gather without being sidewise maligned all the time for wanting to express these creative instincts. So the idea is that list members will post one of their original poems and other list members are free to comment upon it, kindly critique it if they wish, or discuss the ideas and values that it expresses. Or they can discuss something completely different. I would discourage the sharing of those "feel-good" stories and stuff that endless circulate around the Internet and ask that people stick more to their own ideas. I don't ask for any one genre of poetry and discussion. I value Ogden Nash as much as William Blake. Maybe more. Please post a poem of your own from time to time. I will give you some feedback. Maybe explain how it made me feel, what it taught me, why it worked for me, why it maybe didn't work for me, whether I agree with the conclusion or message that it gave, whether I understood the message, whether it moved me to write something of my own. Stuff like that. I think that we can develop a sustaining network of saints who chose to express themselves in poetry. Notice the list is mormonpoets, not mormonpoems. Maybe it's presumptuous for us to call ourselves poets, but if we write poems whatelse could you call us. (Maybe don't answer that question.) Anyway I hope to develop a community of people not afraid to share inside jokes, fluff and other things so violently discouraged on other list manifestos. Lets get to know each other, encourage each other to improve and expand our art and our faith, and have fellowship and good humour in the process. If you wish to see how the list is going, it has only just had a few days and has only a few members at this point, go to http://www.topica.com/lists/mormonpoets/ You can join there too if you wish or anyone may subscribe by contacting me at matkin@telusplanet.net and I will put them on the list. Tom Matkin - -- Tom Matkin www.matkin.com (1 Jn. 4:8) 8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 13:05:46 -0600 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) - -----Original Message----- From: CDoug91957@aol.com To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com Date: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 9:28 AM Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) (big snip) >In a message dated 00-05-02 14:43:52 EDT, you write: >Is my premise--that the scriptures can be >treated as, because they are, human artifacts--tenable for a believer in the >prophetic mission of Joseph Smith? And if it is, does it create ground on >which believers and nonbelievers can meet for productive conversation? (Or do >I have my shorts in a knot over nothing important?) > >[Colin Douglas] I think the literary issues Colin points out dovetail perfectly with the position of the Mormon Church from its inception that the foundation of our faith does not rest on scripture, but on revelation from living prophets. Hence, I think the literary premise is valid and a legitimate one for discussion. As Colin notes, there has been little direct discussion/study of the literary analysis of scripture, but that was one reason I wrote my book, and I think it an area of considerable interest. The problem is that it will be almost impossible to go there on specifics without crossing over into doctrinal issues which are off topic here. Richard Hopkins - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 12:12:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Kathleen Meredith Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) I accept your conjecture that in general members of the church are hesitant to view the scriptures in Literary terms... As our moderator reminds us, it is difficult to stay on task when attempting to even discuss a critical reading of the scriptures as literature. I do not believe, however that the difficulty to remain within the bounds of critical thought when it comes to viewing holy writ is solely a Mormon phenomenon. A couple of years ago I was in an undergraduate literature class that attempted a cursory study of the Bible as literature. The discussions inevitably were (and I use this word with trepidation) "reduced" to doctrinal beliefs. I imagine the very nature of the text makes a pure critical read difficult. In general, we in the Western world, especially the Christian community (not to mention those of us carrying baggage with tags firmly affixed) are far too close to the material. Hence we read critically the Iliad etc. with much more ease than that which is closest to our hearts. Additionally one must ask oneself the motive for reading the scriptures as literature. Is it merely for the poetry? - - For they can and are often poetic - or rather, as one generally reads critically, to gain a fuller understanding of the authors message and agenda for writing the text? If it is the latter, do we not come full circle to the grey area mentioned above? I apologize if my question is basic in contrast to the discussion that inspired it, but, I am really curious as to your thoughts in this regard. - -km [Kathleen Meredith] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 14:46:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Kathleen Meredith Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) A small aside, but a proof that I do not self-edit well; it should have read "...not to mention those of us carrying baggage with "LDS" tags firmly affixed." - -Katheen Meredith - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 18:57:56 -0400 From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: RE: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) I'd have to add that literary interpretation of the scriptures leads me to nervousness on this count: a literary interpretation sometimes leads to a desire to "improve" the text. Note the huge number of Bible translations and retellings so far. The Jews were scolded for so analyzing their scriptures that they looked "beyond the mark". They finished analyzing what they had and then started seeking more in depth, for which presumption the Lord took away their understanding and gave them Isaiah. Some punishment! Those of us who consider scripture to be a prophet's recording of his own experiences can analyze, if they wish, but those of us who consider scripture the LAW (to quote Jonathan, not the STORY or the POEM) will have difficulty analyzing in quite the same way. Melinda Ambrose - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 00:40:31 EDT From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] National Geographic pages (was: CARD, _Ender's Game_) If the moderator would allow me to do a bit of public fence mending, I wish to clarify that Kathleen Woodbury's National Geographic does *not* have the Ender's Game reading poster in it. Kathleen has e-mailed me privately to describe the advertisement on the back of the Jane Goodall/chimpanzee page in her May 2000 magazine. It is an ad for an outdoor activity in Oregon in July. We live in different parts of the country. It would appear that different regions got different things on that page. So, to Kathleen, thanks for letting me have a little fun at your expense. Sorry for the consternation and extra time you had to take to leaf through the magazine without finding the poster. Thanks for being courageous enough to respond to my post when things didn't add up. And for your graciousness. Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 07:26:24 -0600 From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) At 01:05 PM 5/3/00 -0600, Richard R. Hopkins wrote: >I think the literary issues Colin points out dovetail perfectly with the >position of the Mormon Church from its inception that the foundation of our >faith does not rest on scripture, but on revelation from living prophets. >Hence, I think the literary premise is valid and a legitimate one for >discussion. As Colin notes, there has been little direct discussion/study of >the literary analysis of scripture, but that was one reason I wrote my book, >and I think it an area of considerable interest. The problem is that it will >be almost impossible to go there on specifics without crossing over into >doctrinal issues which are off topic here. Well, I'd like to make an amateurish, stumbling attempt here at some specifics without crossing over into doctrinal issues. I noticed (while preparing my gospel doctrine lesson for last week) that the part in Mosiah about the people of Zeniff/Noah/Limhi had some interesting structural patterns. We start with a frame: Ammon and his company struggling through the wilderness to find Lehi-Nephi, then when they do find it, Ammon and three of the company are thrown immediately into prison due to a case of mistaken identity. When all that is cleared up, they are told the story of the people of Zeniff/Noah/Limhi and they are also told the story of the 43 men who were sent to try to find the land of Zarahemla in order to obtain help in escaping from their bondage under the Lamanites. Then we go back to the frame and have the actual escape. The frame, by the way, is a pretty good story all by itself (many frames tend to be anecdotal, which is ironic because the "real story" is treated as an anecdote by the characters in the frame). I also noticed that there was a "three-act-play" aspect to the frame and to the framed story. Act one of the frame is the first part of the frame. Act two would be the explanation of why the people of Limhi are in bondage to the Lamanites, and act three would be the escape. The framed story's "three-act-play" would be one act for each of the kings, with that story ending in the bondage (or, possibly, the belief after the return of the 43 men, that Zarahemla was probably destroyed and the people of Limhi were stuck in their bondage--a most depressing ending). I find it intriguing to notice that Mormon's abridgement of the plates seems to contain several such "adventure stories"--after all, that's how you could describe the General Moroni parts, too. I guess the reason why this intrigues me so much is that the beginning-middle-end structure of the stories Mormon selected to include in his abridgement go so contrary to certain modern (or would that be post-modern?--I still don't have those straight) writers who insist that real life doesn't have a beginning-middle-end structure and so realistic stories shouldn't either. The stories Mormon shares with us certainly do have beginnings and middles and ends. Of course, they also have sequels. It's a little frustrating, as a gospel doctrine teacher, to have the lessons split up in such a way that they don't follow this structure. The teacher I take turns with will go over the part about Abinadi, and then I will do the two escapes--Limhi's people and Alma's people--from bondage. (Which reminds me. Another structure Mormon seems to use is comparisons--Benjamin versus Noah as kings, the bondage and escapes of Limhi's people versus that of Alma's people, and so on.) I guess there are so many stories there in that section that there's no way, unless you insist on a literary/structural approach, to divide them up story by story. Anyway, not having read Richard's book (is it available, if so, where, and for how much?) and not having had any formal training in literary appreciation (I won't even aspire to literary criticism without a lot more training), I hope I haven't offended those of you who do have such training. I just wanted to share something cool I noticed while reading the Book of Mormon as a writer (which I am whether I'm preparing a gospel doctrine lesson or not). Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:51:23 -0400 From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: [AML] Dramatic scripture reading (was: Comments? (Reading the Scriptures)) I would love to see the scriptures interpreted aloud, word for word, with feeling! The Church puts out decent recordings of the scriptures, but the emotion is definitely not there. Living Scriptures does an excellent job of dramatizing, but they find it necessary to cut the text into little snippets and insert dialogue. Some things, such as Enos' account of his time in the forest, and King Benjamin's speech with the people's reaction, and also Alma's words to the people of Ammonihah would make great listening and, I think, would make them more real to us. There has been a video set made of the Gospels, word for word in Aramaic (?) (alas, I don't speak Aramaic), very well done, apparently well authenticated, but emotion in a foreign language does not hit the nerves the same as emotion in words that are understood. Plus it might be nice to hear Abraham's tone of voice when he says he needed to find a new place of residence. He sounds so calm about it. Why? Oh, just because the priests are trying to kill him. Nothing major. Thought he might see a bit of Canaan and Egypt, you know, travel around a little. On the other hand, Mormon's letters to Moroni, some of them, ahhh, I don't know that I want to hear that with emotion. Or without emotion, for that matter. It's tough to understand why people watch shows that show gore. Bad enough to read it. Anyway, you dramatic readers, you, it would make a great reader's theater or production to promote Sunday School. Melinda Ambrose - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:01:27 EDT From: CDoug91957@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) Jonathan Langford wrote: << The whole question of treating scripture as literature--that is, interpreting it in the same way we interpret literature--raises a host of interesting issues.>> Indeed. <> We are also a literally minded people, very concerned with the straight, referential truth or falsity of statements. Somewhere (I've never been able to find it again since I ran across it about thirty years ago) T. S. Eliot wrote to the effect that a revolutionary age seldom produces a great literature (he was thinking in terms of belles lettres, I think) because in a revolutionary age ideas must be held as believed rather than as felt. I think main-stream (what's the right word here? believing? traditional? active? recommend-holding? straight-arrow?) Mormons feel themselves to be in such a situation, and it affects both how we write and how we read. <> You have been emphasizing the importance of genre in interpreting scripture, and I think you are right on the mark there. Typically, Mormon exegesis fails to recognize this, attempting to treat, say, the book of Esther the same as, say, a discourse by Alma. I read the book of Esther as a slyly humorous, historically inaccurate historical novella with a protagonist I wouldn't want to go up against in a fair fight, because she wouldn't fight fair, and who I am not sure I want to present as a role-model to the Beehives, though I admire her, in much the same way I admire Lieutenant Ripley and la femme Nikita. << I think it's a real question to what degree the techniques of literary criticism are appropriate to scriptural exegesis. The simple answer to the question would seem to be: To the degree that scriptures can be considered as poetry, drama, and narrative, the techniques of literary scholarship ought to be appropriate to their interpretation. Unfortunately, this answer leads immediately to the more difficult question of to what degree the scriptures can be considered as falling into these categories. If we say they are *nothing more* than these, we seem to be denying their status as scripture. If, on the other hand, we say that they may be poetry and narrative, but also something more, we implicitly acknowledge that while the methods of literary scholarship may contribute to their understanding, these methods by themselves are incomplete--and possibly misleading, if we stop there.>> And Kathleen Meredith wrote: << Additionally one must ask oneself the motive for reading the scriptures as literature. Is it merely for the poetry? - For they can and are often poetic - or rather, as one generally reads critically, to gain a fuller understanding of the authors message and agenda for writing the text? If it is the latter, do we not come full circle to the grey area mentioned above? >> I would say that the techniques of "literary" reading are always appropriate, because even a text that is primarily referential and discursive has presentational aspects, the sorts of things that normally come within the purview of literary analysis. When we read the scriptures for their spiritual message, we can recognize that texts communicate partly by how they say what they say. What I am suggesting, in fact, is that we ought to practice literary close reading routinely with the scriptures, even when (maybe especially when) we are reading for spiritual message, not primarily for aesthetic pleasure, in order to extract the richest possible spiritual meaning from them. In doing that, we will sometimes find that they achieve the status of poetry (broadly defined); that is, that they possess "a certain degree or kind of complexity--'rich metaphorical meaning' is a common criterion...--and/or a certain degree of coherence, defined as rationaly or 'organic' unity or otherwise" (John Oliver Perry, _Approaches to the Poem_). At that point, theological interest and more purely aesthetic literary interest intersect. Whether we are reading for theological value or aesthetic value, we should always read the same way, because both the theological exegete and the "literary" exegete have to deal with the same words on the page, and the "literary" aspects of the words on the page can convey meaning that should be factored into the theological exegesis. After pumping the words on the page for all they are worth, we can decide which ones are more or less appropriate for use in "literature" courses or in papers at AML conferences. <> It seems to me that Bible studies are logically a subset of literary studies, and from what rummaging around in Bible studies I've done I'm concluding that it is the Bible studies people who are always behind the theoretical curve, that they are the uninformed provincials (see John Barton, _Reading the Old Testament_). [Colin Douglas] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 08:12:42 -0700 (MST) From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] Gary L. KAPP (painter) [from The Orem Daily Herald] Thursday, May 4th, 2000 ENTERTAINMENT LDS artist known for western subjects expresses religious beliefs on canvas Painting cowboys and Indians has made a living for Gary L. Kapp's family, but his heart is really in religious works. By LAURIE WILLIAMS SOWBY JOURNAL PUBLICATIONS PROVO (May 4) When Gary L. Kapp was a child, he was enthralled by the figures in Arnold Friberg's Book of Mormon paintings that had been reproduced on the pages of the LDS magazine "The Children's Friend." "Those paintings just blew me away," he says. "I looked at them for hours." Now, thanks to the generosity of philanthropists who want to help LDS artists tell their own story, he's able to paint such scenes himself. Many have appeared as LDS magazine "Ensign" covers and illustrations in recent years. The May issue of "The Ensign" magazine features Kapp's painting, "The First Vision," on its cover. Kapp has also recently completed "the first religious painting I've ever done that was for sale." The original oil of "A Voice from the Dust" is for sale at Repartee Gallery in Riverwoods. The 24-inch x 26-inch limited edition print of Joseph Smith receiving the gold plates from the Angel Moroni is available for $125. Call (801) 764-0398 to order. Kapp's contributions have not gone unnoticed locally. On Sunday, May 7, the Provo Arts Council will recognize Kapp's work with its annual arts award. Kapp will be honored at a reception from 4 to 6 p.m. in the art gallery on the lower level of the historic Utah County Courthouse. The public is invited. It's taken many years for Kapp to get where he's always wanted to be. After discovering he was no good at electrical engineering, Kapp graduated from BYU in art in 1966. He became a "one-man art department," doing film strips, backgrounds and anything else they needed at the BYU Motion Picture Studios for 13 years. He still teaches figure drawing part time at BYU and an all-day painting workshop at Provo Art and Frame one day each month. He's spent decades slowly pursuing his own goal of painting scenes from the Book of Mormon and is able to do that more, now that some sponsors have commissioned the works. While the clients own the original paintings, the copyrights are offered to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has used them as cover and article illustrations for "The Ensign." But he knew he couldn't make a living doing Book of Mormon scenes, Kapp says, so he became an expert in painting Native Americans early in his career. Now, "Indians are my bread and butter." While it takes only about a week now to create an entire large Indian scene "because I know the costumes and horses," it's a much longer process for the large Book of Mormon paintings six to nine months each. "I put my heart into them," says the artist. He sometimes also puts his clients into them. The painting "Christ and the Little Children," done for a Phoenix client, includes likenesses of the man's entire family. Another familiar scene of Christ appearing in the New World after his resurrection, "That Ye May Know," has a mother and child in it that are actually portraits of another client's wife and daughter. A major client in Texas is financing a series of 20 mural-size Book of Mormon paintings. "The arts don't exist without philanthropists," said the client, David Larsen. "We can't underestimate the value of religious art to bring to life a story that many can't visualize otherwise." He added that over the past 50 years, most LDS people's images of events in the Book of Mormon have been based on Friberg's paintings. "Gary's will supplement that and take us into the next millennium, helping us visualize events that are so important to us." To accomplish the task, Kapp creates a thumbnail sketch "out of my head." After the client approves it, Kapp starts researching costumes and hiring models often muscular young men he finds at local weight-training centers. Photos of them in various stances help him later as he places figures in the paintings. The costumes don't have to be accurate, notes Kapp, because no one really knows exactly what people wore in Book of Mormon times. "There's a lot of inventing involved," he says, "but I try to keep everything in the flavor of that Central America area." BYU's Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies has helped him a lot, he adds. Nevertheless, "my imagination can have free reign." Having just completed the baptism scene from 3 Nephi, Kapp is now working on a 12th painting for the Texas client. It depicts Christ praying in the midst of children, as told in 3 Nephi 17. Commissions have come from closer to home too. Alan and Karen Ashton commissioned two paintings from Book of Mormon stories, the first depicting the conversion of Alma the Younger and the second of Alma and Amulek in prison. Kapp's sister, composer Janice Kapp Perry, commissioned the scene of Joseph Smith's first vision that appears on the May "Ensign" cover. For now, the original is hanging in the artist's living room near the grand piano. His original portraits of "Christ with the Red Robe" and "The Prophet Joseph Smith" are also hanging in the living room. Kapp feels gratified that prints of the two portraits have sold well enough to support four sons on missions. The adjacent entry hall displays a buffalo skull a relic of the mountain man rendezvous Kapp used to attend each year. A gouache painting of an Indian and several horses in the woods hangs on another wall next to the studio door. Kapp says it's the only one of his own works that he owns "I can't afford to keep them." Two of his own bronzes with western subjects are also on display, but the artist says he much prefers painting because of the dramatic light it's possible to create on canvas. And he's glad to be in a studio with lots of light now. He painted in his basement until about 13 years ago, when his kids five sons and a daughter needed the space for bedrooms. So they added a slope-roofed studio with north-facing windows onto what used to be the front of the home he and Diane moved into 26 years ago. Along with canvases in progress, and the usual stacks of art magazines and books, the room has rifles and snowshoes mounted on the wall, Indian clothing hanging from racks, and an old saddle dangling from the loft railing. Kapp mentions that he once owned several antique saddles but traded them for instruments when his family formed a bluegrass band. He played the banjo. Kapp spends about 14 hours a day, six days a week, in his studio and has found it a convenient way to be near his family. The long hours have yielded numerous paintings, most of which are sold outside the state at prices up to $10,000 each in galleries in Houston, Dallas, Santa Fe, Scottsdale, and Jackson Hole. ("Utah isn't quite converted to art prices yet," he notes.) "Cowboys and Indians have kept food on the table," says Kapp, adding that the year he was commissioned to furnish an entire home in Deer Valley with large Western scenes and landscapes was one of his better years in an up-and-down business. But his heart is really in religious art. Hanging in a frame on Kapp's studio wall are the words of former LDS Church President Ezra Taft Benson: "I have seen a vision of artists putting into film, drama, literature, music and paintings great themes from the Book of Mormon." And Kapp is thrilled that he is at last able to do that. "All I've ever wanted to do was paint the Book of Mormon," he says. His Texas client is happy to make it possible. Said Larsen, "It's our testimony of truth, in paint and canvas." Copyright 2000 The Orem Daily Journal - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 22:00:00 -0400 From: Kent Larsen Subject: [AML] MN "God's Army" Draws Positive Review in LA Times: Los Angeles Times 28Apr00 A4 From Mormon-News: See footer for instructions on joining and leaving this list. Do you have an opinion on this news item? Send it to letters.to.editor@MormonsToday.com "God's Army" Draws Positive Review in LA Times (Movie Review; A Mormon Mission to L.A. in 'God's Army') Los Angeles Times pg21 28Apr00 A4 By Kathleen Craughwell LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA -- The Los Angeles Times reviewed "God's Army" in its first week in LA area theaters, giving the film a mostly positive review and thorough description. Noting that the film is in 'limited release,' the Times says that the film is "not a movie heavy on proselytizing," which hopefully will make the film more appealing to non-LDS Church members. The Times also goes a bit farther, noting that "God's Army" is unique, saying that it is "a mostly nonsentimental look at a world of believers and issues of faith, both of which we rarely see in movies." However, the Times does take issue with the title, saying that it "communicates zealotry of the most off-putting kind." But then it immediately praises the film, saying, "the movie is actually a sensitive and thoughtful probe into questions of faith and the difficulties faced by those who are called to teach others." The bulk of the article is simply descriptive of the movie's plot and characterization. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 11:02:02 -0600 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) - -----Original Message----- From: Kathleen Woodbury To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com ; aml-list@lists.xmission.com Date: Thursday, May 04, 2000 10:22 AM Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) >Anyway, not having read Richard's book (is it available, if so, where, and >for how much?) and not having had any formal training in literary >appreciation (I won't even aspire to literary criticism without a lot more >training), I hope I haven't offended those of you who do have such training. > >Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury Thanks for asking. The book to which Colin has been referring is _Biblical Mormonism_ and is available through Deseret or about any LDS bookstore. If they don't have it, it can be ordered from Horizon Publishers. But I hasten to mention that it is primarily a doctrinal work. That is, after giving the rules of hermeneutics, the principal purpose of the book is to employ the rules of hermeneutics (or "construction" as we lawyers call it) to show that Mormon doctrine is, in fact, biblical based on the kind of literary analysis of scripture that is commonly done among other Christian Bible scholars. Richard Hopkins PS It is correct to note that this kind of analysis tends to draw an overabundance of lawyers to its ranks. That's not entirely because the Bible is the LAW and should be interpreted judicially rather than as literature. It is because the methods for determining what scripture means, what message is being given to us today through its application to some ancient facts, are the same as those used by a lawyer to determine what specific nuance of the law applies to the unique facts s/he is dealing with. Hence from the time of Christ, who was besieged by Jewish lawyers, through the second century AD, which had its Tertullian, to C.I. Scofield, one of the great Evangelical scholars of the nineteenth century, to the Church today, with it's J. Ruben Clark and its Dallin Oaks, etc., lawyers have been irresistibly drawn to theology and the analysis of scripture. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 09:36:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Stacy Burton Subject: Re: [AML] Comments? (Reading the Scriptures) > Personally, I've been fascinated to note that many of > the most active and influential interpreters of scripture in the LDS > tradition of the last 50 years or so have been lawyers by training. > Relatively few have been literature majors. Which may say a number of > different things, but at the very least it suggests to me that the LDS way > of looking at scripture may at this point--for whatever reason--be more > amenable to juridical than literary interpretation. The scriptures are The > Law, not The Story (or The Poem) in LDS thinking. The effect of this tendency has, I think, been quite unfortunate. It promotes the idea of scripture as prooftext rather than the appreciation of scriptural texts *as texts*, produced in specific historical and cultural and, yes, literary contexts for particular purposes and read in other contexts, often for other purposes. > It's true that the field of literary studies (so-called) has specialized > primarily in the study of drama, fiction (narrative), and poetry. "So-called?" If you mean to refer to the academic study of literature, this statement was true as recently as a decade or so ago, but now--to a significant degree--is inaccurate. Other genres--from essay, autobiography, memoir, diary, travel narrative to legal texts--now receive a great deal of critical attention. > I think it's a real question to what degree the techniques of literary > criticism are appropriate to scriptural exegesis. The simple answer to the > question would seem to be: To the degree that scriptures can be considered > as poetry, drama, and narrative, the techniques of literary scholarship > ought to be appropriate to their interpretation. Genre criticism is but one of many approaches to literary study; others of interest here would certainly include critical approaches concerned with voice and narrative authority and discourse; with myth; and with a substantial constellation of sociohistorical concerns, particularly gender and race. Stacy Burton - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:41:45 -0700 From: The Reber Family Subject: [AML] Reading the Scriptures - --------------40C5F227CB5193386939BA4B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > When we read the scriptures for their spiritual > message, we can recognize that texts communicate partly by how they say what > they say. What I am suggesting, in fact, is that we ought to practice > literary close reading routinely with the scriptures, even when (maybe > especially when) we are reading for spiritual message, not primarily for > aesthetic pleasure, in order to extract the richest possible spiritual > meaning from them. > I agree completely. I took a Religion class at BYU in the 80's from Suzanne Lundquist. Being an English professor, she presented the Old Testament basically as a piece of literature - in all possible senses of that word. For me it was an eye-opening a-ha! experience because I was finally able to see how all of those very different stories fit together. I realized for the first time that the covenant given to Abraham was *exactly* the same covenant given to Adam, Enoch, Noah, etc. The wording the Lord used was the same, the promises He made were the same, and the behavior He expected in return was the same. In other words, Moses put Genesis together in the way he did in order to drive home a very important point - - God has always made covenants with his people and will continue to do so. Of course, much more than just covenant making is going on in Genesis, but only by looking at how and why the book was written (literary criticism) did it make sense on that level. I wonder if we are not afraid to examine our scriptures in a close way because we don't want them to "fall" from being the word of God to being something else. However, if done from the framework that they are sacred, all LDS scriptures will stand up to the test of literary criticism and can reveal some incredible things. Rebecca Reber - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #31 *****************************