From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #290 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, March 30 2001 Volume 01 : Number 290 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 10:50:01 -0700 From: Mike South Subject: Re: [AML] Writing Schedules I've been working on a personal project since the beginning of this year, and I've settled into a routine that works like this: LUNCHTIME: sneak away from work (this often requires eating lunch in the car) and head to the library for an hour to work out ideas for the next part of the project. Put the notes away and let 'em jell for a couple of weeks. END OF WORK: head home and do all the home stuff (dinner, cleaning, laundry, play with the kids, read to them, then get them into bed, etc.) Spend the next hour or so getting re-acquainted with my wife (foot rubs are and especially important skill to develop). AROUND 10 - ABOUT MIDNIGHT: pull out the notes that are already a couple of weeks old, decide what works and what doesn't, then start writing and drawing. Important detail: keep Simpson's, Frasier, and M*A*S*H running in the background (I've seen them all often enough that I don't have to pay attention, but I like the noise and the jokes.) FRIDAY: forget the project for a night and go do something fun with the family and/or the loving and exceptionally patient spouse. This schedule has worked pretty well so far, though I do occasionally miss a day. We're going to have a new baby in a few weeks, so I'm pretty sure I'll need to throw the whole thing out the window (the schedule, not the baby) and start over. - --Mike South - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 10:51:26 -0800 From: "jana bouck remy" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors > > What is the rational behind referring to Julie Jensen as > "non-practicing" and Steve Atkin as "a non-pracaticing Mormon?" > I found the use of this phrase called undue attention to itself. I wondered what exactly it meant--"nonpracticing Mormon"? I understand that it is important to establish the Mormon-ness of the artist to justify their being in Irreantum. But could we find a different way to do it? I'd love to hear the ideas of other Listers on this topic... Jana Remy "Well-behaved women rarely make history" --Laurel Thatcher Ulrich - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 12:54:57 -0600 From: Diann T Read Subject: [AML] Re: [AML-Mag] Fictionalizing Reality Rose (and all), On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 18:24:56 -0600 "Rose Green" writes: > Here's a question for those of you who have done a lot more writing > than I have: How does one deal with the seemingly contrasting ideas of > writing from what you know, and the statement "the characters are fictional > and any similarity to real persons, either living or dead, is coincidental"? To some extent, I suppose this depends on whether you're writing fiction or works along the line of histories or biographies, where you're dependent on facts. I'm going to assume for the sake of this response that you're writing fiction. As a fiction-writer myself, I can tell you that some of the characters in my books are composites of people I've known and/or their traits or mannerisms. I'm sort of a "people watcher," and sometimes I even take notes on intriguing or amusing things I've observed. Human beings are so multifaceted that no matter how unique and individual you may try to make your characters, there's bound to be some similarity to someone out there. Because of that, I've never considered that statement to be much of a problem. > What about that student awhile back who wanted > to write the sad story of her ex-Mormon bishop father? Wouldn't she > have run the risk of a libel suit if people felt offended enough? How > have you handled this? This is an entirely different matter, and I'm afraid I don't have anything to offer on this. I'll be interested to see what others may have to say about it. Diann T. Read - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 12:44:14 -0700 (MST) From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] Satire (was: Fame and Ego) > I'll reveal my deeply hidden shame because it is relevant to the = > discussion and supports Eric's point here--I am a huge Tiffany fan. > I know all the arguments about why I shouldn't like her music, but I > do. I own both her albums (er, cassettes?) and still listen to them > occasionally, much to Melissa's dismay. > > Jacob Proffitt You can't be that big a fan - she actually has four albums out, not two!!! ;) - --Ivan Wolfe, who is not a fan of Tiffany, but whose wife is. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 13:11:08 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Game_ (Review) "Woman of Destiny" became "Saints." It was always "Saints," but the publisher didn't think that would sell so he put a sexy woman on the front in a cape. It sold anyway. Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 12:27:28 -0700 From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: [AML] Exultate Concert Friday BYU If any of you are going to be in Provo this weekend, there will be a concert at the BYU Museum of Art presented by the new Utah choral group, Exultate, directed by Russell Wilson. AML choir members include myself and Eric Samuelsen. This initial appearance of the choir will include orchestra for Rutter's "Requiem." It begins at 7:30 PM Friday night. Tickets are available at the door Cathy (Gileadi) Wilson Editing Etc. 1400 West 2060 North Helper UT 84526 - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 13:12:06 -0700 From: "Benson Parkinson" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors Thought I'd put in my two cents as a former Irreantum editor. We started = doing this because the question on everyone's mind when they read about = Mormon artists is how their faith relates to their artistic production. = That question's pretty central to what we conceived Irreantum was all = about. Every article I've ever read about Julie Jensen either says she's = inactive or that she's left the Church. (I don't know about Steve Atkin.) = I think the practice is legitimate, at least when artists have stated = their opinion about the Church publically or it's generally known, and I = hope the current editors will keep doing it.=20 Ben Parkinson >>> ThomDuncan@prodigy.net 03/28/01 10:27AM >>> But I have one nit-picky question: What is the rational behind referring to Julie Jensen as "non-practicing" and Steve Atkin as "a non-pracaticing Mormon?"=20 - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 15:00:02 -0700 From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: RE: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors Thom, I'll take this to the Irreantum editorial staff and we'll discuss = it. I see your points but also think there's some value in reporting what = the subjects have made public about their church status (of course, it = takes careful verification to ascertain exactly WHAT they have made public = and what is due to gossip and/or reading between the lines). In the meantime, do you want to submit a letter to the editor about this = for publication in the next issue? Maybe even just this post? If so, sent = it to irreantum2@cs.com. Chris Bigelow - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:12:38 -0700 From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors Gotta go along with Thom on this. We have all sorts of degrees of orthodoxy and heterodoxy in the Church--and particularly in the artistic community. I, for example, am a fan of Diet Coke. I publish in _Sunstone_ and _Dialogue_ (which my Bishop no longer discusses with me during temple recommend interviews; he simply says, "Oh, and I know about _Dialogue_ and _Sunstone_, so you don't need to go there"). Years ago, Terry Tempest Williams didn't want to appear on an AML panel because she's not "orthodox." Martha Nibley was also identified in a recent AML publication or post as "non-practising" (and in fact, she has had her name removed from the records, so it goes beyond non-practising), but her Mormon upbringing clearly affects her writing, and she speaks at lengh about Mormonism in at least one of her books. The AML has given awards to all sorts of Mormons--coffee drinkers, self-described apostates, and bishops. I don't really think we need to know where everyone rates on the orthodoxy scale to appreciate what they add to the community. [Margaret Young] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:13:42 -0700 From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] B.J. ROWLEY, _My Body Fell Off!_ (Review) I just love it when Jeff claims not to be an old fuddie duddie. And part of it is true. Jeff is not old. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:15:20 -0700 From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Game_ (Review) I'm wondering how WOMEN felt about _Saints_ (which once had a Harlequin Romance-type cover). I know some who were deeply offended by the obvious use of Eliza R. Snow's history. Edward Hogan wrote: > Woman of Destiny was, I believe, retitled _Saints_. It's one of my > favorites too. I liked his handling of Joseph Smith's polygamy. It made me > feel about as good about polygamy, Joseph Smith, and the Church as I think > I'm ever going to. > > Ned - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:25:10 -0700 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors Benson Parkinson wrote: > > Thought I'd put in my two cents as a former Irreantum editor. We started doing this because the question on everyone's mind when they read about Mormon artists is how their faith relates to their artistic production. That question's pretty central to what we conceived Irreantum was all about. Every article I've ever read about Julie Jensen either says she's inactive or that she's left the Church. (I don't know about Steve Atkin.) I think the practice is legitimate, at least when artists have stated their opinion about the Church publically or it's generally known, and I hope the current editors will keep doing it. FWIW, I find the practice offensive. Another reason: Though I attend Church regularly, and have a current Temple Recommend, I share many of the feelings and beliefs of some people who have left the Church, or have become inactive. My reasons for remaining within the fold despite my doubts (and, in some case, disbeliefs) are my own, and I've recounted them ad nauseum on other forums where such things are more appropriate than on this forum. I resent the implication in calling a writer of similar beliefs to my own an inactive because it invalidates, in one fell swoop, my own status in the Church. I'm sensitive to the way many active Church members interpret the term inactive, as someone less faithful, or morally deficient in some way. More than one person, knowing of my personal beliefs, has expressed amazement that I am still active. I would hope a reader would judge my writing on its own merit. But I'm aware that, having a negative opinion of my Church loyalty, a more orthodox member is likely to judge my writing through the lens of their own judgment. Therefore, I consider it an unfair disadvantage to a writer to advertise their loyalty to the Church, especially if that status is irrelevant to the subject matter they are writing about. - -- Thom Duncan Playwrights Circle an organization of professionals - -------------------------- Shameless Plug - ------------------------------- Don't miss the Playwrights Circle Summer Festival at UVSC! *J. Golden* - a one-man play by James Arrington, starring Marvin Payne *SFX5* - 5 original short science fiction plays *Peculiarities* - a new full-length play by Eric Samuelsen For more information about the Playwrights Circle and our summer festival: http://www.playwrightscircle.com - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 18:04:01 -0600 From: "Rose Green" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: [AML-Mag] Fictionalizing Reality Diann, Thanks for your comments. >As a fiction-writer myself, I can tell you >that some of the characters in my books are composites of people I've >known and/or their traits or mannerisms. I'm sort of a "people watcher," >and sometimes I even take notes on intriguing or amusing things I've >observed. Yes, this is sort of the thing I'm thinking of, when you observe people doing something funny (or being a funny character) that you'd like to include in your fiction, but it isn't always complimentary. For example, when my husband and I had been married a couple weeks and were in the Amsterdam airport waiting for a connecting flight to Germany, we met this woman. She was maybe in her 40s but trying to look younger (you know, too much heavy makeup and "youthful" clothing styles) and everything about her screamed, "I'm an American!" She saw us and gushed over and struck up a conversation, all about how she had come to Amsterdam "to meet the love of her life" (but was quick to add that her husband had died and she was there with the approval of her adult children, so we didn't get any wrong ideas about her.) Such a great minor character, but not exactly a flattering description. I take it that's the kind of people-watching you do that is okay to include? Actually, maybe there is quite a lot of room to fictionalize reality out there; I think Card's so obvious retellings of Joseph Smith have the "this is fiction, with no relation to reality" statement on the back of the title page. Rose Green _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 17:12:43 -0700 From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Game_ (Review) I enjoyed _Saints_. I'm not a big Card fan (I haven't read much Card so I'm not saying I *don't* like him) but a non-member acquaintance gave it to me as airplane reading. He still doesn't believe me that Dinah whatever-her-name-is isn't a real person. ("But the introduction says...") Marianne Hales Harding - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 19:53:39 -0700 From: Scott and Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [AML] Writing Groups D. Michael Martindale wrote: >William Morris wrote: > > > Do any of you who are writing on a regular basis use a > > writer's group or some sort of peer response set-up? > > > all the non-Mormon writers I > > know here swear by them, wouldn't dare try and publish > > work without them. > > > I know that D. Michael runs a fairly active Web-based > > peer review group---how do the rest of you get > > feedback? Is it a 'must'? If so, how much time > > should you allow in your writing schedules for such > > activities? > >If you've noticed my writers group, you probably have also noticed that >I, too, swear by writers groups. (I have been known to utter things like >"Holy WorLDSmiths, that hurt!" when hammering my thumb or something.) >After having seen the difference between my pre- and post-critiqued >writing, I wouldn't be caught dead letting the public see an >un-critiqued piece of work. I agree. Mostly. I guess. Sort of. Sometimes. Maybe not. Actually, it really depends on the group. The wrong group at the wrong time can be a truly unpleasant experience that can do some pretty unfortunate things to the unwary writer. I've been a member of about fifteen different writing groups over the years, some of them good, some of them bad, and some of them indifferent. Some have gone from bad to good as they changed over time, and as I changed over time. Some (possibly conflicting) thoughts about writing groups... * Sometimes writers are not very good critiquers (though sometimes they are). The skill set is quite different between writing and commenting, and many a good writer will is completely unable to articulate either a problem or a solution. * Writers often end up trying to recast your story in their own image. They'll make suggestions that will tend to reveal the story they would have told--BUT THAT MAY NOT BE *YOUR* STORY. You need to be able to tell the difference, and be strong enough to stick to your guns if the commenter's suggestions don't help clarify your own story. * Use a wide variety of readers. Different viewpoints and sets of experience can reveal different weaknesses (and strengths) in your manuscript. If you can assemble a group of writers and readers from different genres, you can often learn a lot more about the dynamics of writing as a general form--or at least more so than in a group composed of people with essentially similar tastes and talents. * Keep a set of individual readers outside of your writing group. The group dynamic can often lead down a path that leaves an entire area of concern untouched, while overworking another area. A single, uncontaminated reader can often be more effective than a group feeding on itself. * Keep a second set of readers to look at your rewrites. Whether that's a second critique group or just a set of individual readers is largely irrelevant. It's hard to read a story for the second time and offer strong comments untainted by your first experience. * Work with a group that prepares at least some of their comments in advance. While the interaction of people in a group is often great for brainstorming and problem-solving, pre-prepared comments have a better chance of covering the whole story. First reactions are good. But so are well-aged reactions. * Get a writing group that can teach you something. Ideally, you should be the weakest writer in the group so that you're constantly learning from your betters. Unfortunely, the better writers are trying to do the same thing, so it may be hard to attach to a really good critique group. * Make sure you read other people's work and comment on it. As you learn to view stories critically, you also learn to criticize your own work, and your first drafts will improve for the knowledge. * If a group is not meeting your needs--in other words, if you don't feel like the group is helping your fiction improve--walk away and look for a new group. Staying with a group that isn't helping you improve is a waste of your time, and can become actively damaging. In this case, be selfish. ===== Like Michael, I rarely show my stuff to an editor without having a fair number of readers look at it and comment on it. I don't claim to be a good writer, but I think I'm a pretty good rewriter. For me a writing group is invaluable. But not everyone benefits from a group. Some prefer single readers, some find a bad group where ego is more important than improvement, and some just work better on their own. A group can provide a lot of input, not all of which is valid or useful. You need to know how to manage the input to keep the good stuff while letting the rest slide right on by. Finding a good group is disappointingly hard. I would look for a group that contains several publishing authors. If you know a local author (whose work you respect), consider asking that person about good groups to join. Online groups are surprisingly hit-or-miss, though I've heard good things about WorLDSmiths. And if you can't find a good group, look for good individuals. I think having real readers comment on your work is an absolute necessity--or at least it is for me at this point in my apprenticeship. In the end, though, the most important thing you can do is write and learn to write better--be it through books, conferences, writing groups, or just plain practice. Scott Parkin - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:18:43 -0700 From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 10:27:50 -0700, Thom Duncan wrote: >I would suggest a policy of using labels that refer only to a person's >profession or avocation (such as "Film Maker Richard Dutcher") and >remove all references to even their church membership. At the very list, >if you want to refer to a person's religious standing, do so if they are >acative and believing, but dont mention their LDS status if they are >inactive. I, for one, am grateful for the information on a person's relationship to the church. Particularly when they claim LDS ties. I want to know if a person left the church or not. That information plays a role in my perception of the artist. It isn't something I need, mind you. I am perfectly capable of judging the merit of a work without knowing anything about an author. But since the point of Irreantum biographies and interviews is to get to know the author, the question of their relation = to the church is important. Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:20:05 -0700 From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: [AML] Re: Tiffany (was: Satire) On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 12:44:14 -0700 (MST), Ivan Angus Wolfe wrote: >> I'll reveal my deeply hidden shame because it is relevant to the =3D >> discussion and supports Eric's point here--I am a huge Tiffany fan. >= I know all the arguments about why I shouldn't like her music, but I > = do. I own both her albums (er, cassettes?) and still listen to them > = occasionally, much to Melissa's dismay. =20 >>=20 >> Jacob Proffitt > >You can't be that big a fan - she actually has four albums out, not = two!!! ;) > >--Ivan Wolfe, who is not a fan of Tiffany, but whose wife is. That's true enough. I liked Tiffany at the height of her popularity and bought the most famous album and the one immediately following. Then I = went on a mission and never pursued any earlier or later works. Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 00:33:41 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Game_ (Review) Lee Allred wrote: > I mention this partly because I'd heard a rumour (apparently false) at > the BYU sf symposium this month that Card had given up doing > booksignings. > > --Lee > > [MOD: My understanding is that what Card has given up is multicity book > signing tours, not individual book signings.] He would do whirlwind two-week non-stop multicity tours every time a book came out. That was getting to him physically and emotionally. Those are the singings he won't do anymore. But he still seems to be doing plenty of appearances. He says he'll be taking trips that he can include his family on now. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 01:41:55 -0800 From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Writing Groups At 12:38 AM 3/28/01 -0700, D. Michael Martindale wrote: >What's the point of churning out volumes and >volumes of unreviewed dreck? As long as it gets published anyway, money. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 20:28:43 -0800 From: "Levi Peterson" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors A non-practicing Catholic is one who doesn't go to mass. The term most often used for Mormons is "inactive," isn't it? It strikes me that non-practicing is equally useful though I like the term "Jack Mormon" best of all. However, you have to work at being a Jack Mormon, while being merely an inactive Mormon means quite the opposite. Good Jack Mormons practice their backsliding with an express eye to affronting their more righteous neighbors. Levi Peterson althlevip@msn.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 03:08:38 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Shadow_ (Review) ENDER'S SHADOW by Orson Scott Card December 2000, Tor Books Mass market paperback, 469 pages $6.99 "Fascinating, But Definitely Not the Big One" People often ask Orson Scott Card why he doesn't write something else as popular as _Ender's Game_. His response is, he wishes he could. He's tried. Then along comes _Ender's Shadow_. Not a sequel, not a prequel--I guess that makes it an equel? But the book certainly isn't an equal to the legendary novel that spawned it. Not that _Ender's Shadow_ isn't fascinating to read. There's lots of room for a novel to be good, even if it doesn't measure up to the most popular book by one of the biggest science fiction authors ever. _Shadow_ on its own would be judged a good novel, well worth reading. It's not its fault that it will inevitably be compared to The Big One. Where _Ender's Game_ is the story of a very young Ender Wiggin, boy savior of humanity, _Ender's Shadow_ is the story of his even younger sidekick, Bean, who is his right hand man from Battle School all the way to the victory over the Buggers. _Shadow_ covers the same time period, but from Bean's point of view. This is what makes _Ender's Shadow_ so fascinating: many gaps in the original tale are filled in as we follow Bean on his adventures that Ender, and we, never knew about. But contrary to Card's claim that either book can be read first, I can't imagine appreciating _Ender's Shadow_ nearly as much unless you read _Ender's Game_ first. There's very little duplication between the two books--what's covered in the first is glossed over in the second--and I can't see how people could truly understand the Battle School without first reading _Ender's Game_: how the games and the politics among the children soldiers work, and even what happened during the individual training battles that Ender and Bean participated in. But we do get an in-depth understanding of Bean, who starts out as a street urchin in Rotterdam on the verge of starving to death. We are introduced to his superior intellect--the very sort of intellect the Battle School is looking for--as he parries with a street gang for a morsel of food instead of being murdered by them. You might expect that he ends up in charge of the gang, like any self-respecting brilliant kid strategist, but that would be too cliche for Card. Instead Bean begins manifesting his "behind the scenes" approach to power, from whence the book gets its name, by becoming the shadow power behind the figurehead leader of the gang. He influences the leader to do things that help the gang scavenge for more food than they've ever had before. His ideas are so effective, they end up being adopted by all the gangs in the city, and the watchful eyes from the Battle School begin to notice an amazing thing happening among the anarchic urchins of Rotterdam: they are becoming civilized. Because _Ender's Game_ is Card's most popular (and lucrative) book, it might be tempting to attribute a mercenary motive to him for writing _Shadow_--trying to cash in even more on the Ender phenomenon. I wouldn't fault him for wanting to do so, as long as he wrote a good book in the process--but that conclusion would not be accurate. Card had considered opening up Ender's universe to other authors to write in. He even lined the first one up. But as he developed the story with the other author, he began to realize that he cared very much about Bean's story. Card wrote _Ender's Shadow_ for the same reason he's written every other of his books: he wanted to write a story that mattered to him. Card takes an intriguing mix of elements and synthesizes them into a complex and--well, I can't get Spock's favorite word out of my head to describe _Ender's Shadow_--fascinating novel. But through my entire reading experience, I couldn't shake the feeling that something was missing. The characterization didn't seem quite truthful--carefully, cleverly, and consistently crafted, but not quite truthful. I couldn't place my finger on why. Perhaps it's because, in _Ender's Game_, we like Bean. He seems a good and decent kid who is loyal to Ender. In _Ender's Shadow_, we learn that many of the likeable things he did in _Ender's Game_ were motivated by calculating and cold-blooded self-servience. Bean turns out to be quite the sociopath--understandably so, considering his harsh upbringing. In fact, I found myself wondering if he was still better than a real boy would turn out under similar circumstances. But it was disappointing to find the Bean of _Ender's Game_ was an illusion. I can't fault the author for this. He was being true to the character he created. But the end result is that _Ender's Shadow_ is a fascinating (there's that word again) intellectual study that doesn't affect the reader at the emotional level that _Ender's Game_ does. Perhaps it can't, given the nature of the story. Perhaps it's as good as that story can be, and only suffers in comparison to its towering, emotion-laden cousin. Nevertheless, _Ender's Shadow_ is still a book that holds its own against other notable science fiction books by Card and other authors. None of my reservations should deter anyone from reading it. Just don't expect _Ender's Game_. Expect a very different book. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:21:42 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors I'm sorry, but I kind of agree with Benson. If they used to be Mormon, and are messing around with Mormon themes, that is an entirely different kind of thing from us "Mormon" Mormons who are trying to write to an audience of faith. Entirely different. In fact, downright amazingly different. Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:25:32 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors If there were another way to do it, that might be fine. I hate the word "disaffected," but what about "past" or "disengaged," "past friend of the LDS Church?" I'm just shooting off at the mouth. Someone else, please come up with something. Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:19:02 -0700 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors I'm with Margaret and Thom on this one. I'm not an active Mormon. I'm a = couch potato Mormon. I'm a beached whale Mormon. Oh, wait, you mean on = Sundays. Yeah, then I do rouse myself for a three hour block, then it's = back to inactive status. (GOOD nap days, Sundays are). =20 Wednesday nights, I'm particularly inactive. (Ed PLUS West Wing PLUS Law = and Order!) NBA playoffs, I become totally inactive, until the inevitable = annual elimination of the Jazz, and then I get a bit more active, = especially when dealing with crabgrass. I'm a very inactive home teacher. = Oh, I go and all, but as far as all that energetic galumphing around on = the floor with the little'uns on my back is concerned, I figure that's = what priests are for. As for getting in shape, I don't need to. I mean, = round's a shape. I'm also a very unorthodox Mormon. Proud of it. I cuss, a lot. I never = wear a tie. I participate, very loudly I'm told, in Priesthood, until my = son elbows me awake again. =20 So, better call me inactive. Temple recommend holding BYU professor, = sure. But happily inactive, and looking to get more inactive this = weekend. Passive voice sentence construction and serious falling = inflections are the best cure for insomnia I know. Eric Samuelsen - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:36:54 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Writing Schedules Mike, this is funny and wonderful. ESPECIALLY to see you take kid responsibility like a modern father. While I was doing eighteen batches of laundry for the Villa Theatre, I said to myself, "I know now why most great writers, musicians, politicians, statesmen, scientists, movie-makers are MEN." I say MOST. I know there are Madame Curie exceptions who bucked the odds. Anyway, now is the day of TWO people working together to do what they want to do. If they want to create art as well as families, they have to "work it out." I do a lot of dishes and laundry, but my husband does a lot of pounding nails and selling houses to keep us floating. We try to keep it equal. And now that we are bent over old "fuddie duddies," it's working pretty well. (Grin) Marilyn Brown - ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike South > I've been working on a personal project since the beginning of this year, > and I've settled into a routine that works like this: [snip] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:39:12 -0700 From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors >The AML has >given awards to all sorts of Mormons--coffee drinkers, self-described >apostates, and bishops. I don't really think we need to know where >everyone >rates on the orthodoxy scale to appreciate what they add to the community. > >[Margaret Young] This is true. It's interesting to know, but, to be entirely honest, a large part of that interest is on a gossipy level. (speaking for myself) Marianne Hales Harding _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:13:50 +0000 From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] B.J. ROWLEY, _My Body Fell Off!_ (Review) Hee hee hee! At 04:13 PM 3/29/01 -0700, you wrote: >I just love it when Jeff claims not to be an old fuddie duddie. And part of it >is true. Jeff is not old. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:50:17 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: [AML] _Anne Frank_ Performance (was: Exultate Concert) I am going to stick this in here, hoping you will all at least be aware that you have a choice! Congratulations to Exultate! It sounds wonderful. But also at 7:30 Friday night there is the opening night of Anne Frank. There are two Anne Franks, and Sharlee Glen's daughter Erica will be playing it Monday night, April 2 at the Little Brown Theatre, 239 S. Main in Springville. And she is wonderful! (Both young actresses are outstanding--you won't find any better! It's a great show!) Also, tonight, Bill will be receiving a regional award for his service to community theatre, etc. (It's going to be a surprise to him--I'm so grateful for the people in Denver who really do appreciate what he has done, though it's a bit uphill in our community because it's true, as someone said at one time that we are a bit off the beaten track, and Springville has not responded much yet with only 17% of our patrons from Springville--but we keep hanging in there--and Eric Snider has been a help). Thanks! Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 13:28:02 -0600 From: Craig Huls Subject: Re: [AML] Writing Groups Hurrah! Someone besides me is in this game for lucre! Ronn Blankenship wrote: > At 12:38 AM 3/28/01 -0700, D. Michael Martindale wrote: > >What's the point of churning out volumes and > >volumes of unreviewed dreck? > > As long as it gets published anyway, money. > - -- Craig Huls Huls & Associates email:dcraigh@onramp.net webpage:http://rampages.onramp.net/~dcraigh - - 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 #290 ******************************