From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #417 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 Tuesday, August 7 2001 Volume 01 : Number 417 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:34:28 -0700 From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: [AML] Granite Publishing Query Hello all. Does anyone know if Granite Publishing in Salt Lake City is a vanity publisher, or are they more like Deseret Book, publishing works for the Church? (Not a well-worded question, but you know what I'm asking.) Thanks. [Jeff Needle] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 04:45:27 -0500 From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: [AML] Misc. Observations Subject: Re: [AML] Mission of Mormon Letters? At 02:41 PM 8/2/01, Jeff Savage wrote: >Now can we >get them to publish a book about a huge, rabid, missionary who goes on a >killing spree in a small NE town. Hmmm.... OK, just as long as he makes sure to submit the names of his victims to the nearest temple for posthumous baptism . . . - --------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Use of Language (was: Artists vs. Illustrators) At 11:26 AM 8/3/01, amelia parkin wrote: >sorry. i write in tangents. That's OK. I underline a lot of words and use so many exclamation points that some might say that I write in hyperbolic tangents . . . [Get Laurel to explain it to you, Jonathan . . .] - --------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: [AML] Audience for Mormon Lit At 02:41 PM 8/3/01, Jacob Proffitt wrote: >A man who is sitting down reading >something with a colorful cover is a man with too much time on his >hands--he's probably sinning, if not actively, then at least by >omission. So _that's_ why I haven't been translated yet . . . [Ronn Blankenship] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1904 00:02:35 -0600 From: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] Fw: MN New AP Stylebook Still Recommends "Mormon Church": on 8/3/01 12:49 PM, Barbara Hume at barbara@techvoice.com wrote: > Well, we've been called worse things than Mormons. True. >The name "Church of > Jesus Christ" doesn't work for me because it sounds like a Protestant > denomination. But, since it came from his own lips as the proper name of the church.... :-) Steve - -- skperry@mac.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:08:16 -0600 From: "Marjorie Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Utah Mormon Culture >In the end it's up to the kid. But it is easier if you can hang out wit= h >kids who have the same value system. > >By the way, I love the Mormons in Utah, but I have spoken to some of the= m, >and they really do have no idea that life is different outside of their >valley. Unless they've lived somewhere else or served a mission. > You bet the kids in Utah have problems, just like kids anywhere else. I = wonder why people in the "Mission Field" think that just because someone = is born and raised in Utah with a strong Mormon heritage and fine upstand= ing active parents, that they automatically have a built in testimony and= value system just like that of their parents and the majority of the com= munity? When the kids in Utah heard the general authorities say, "Dare t= o be different!" Boy did they ever dare. Our schools are full of wannabe= gangbangers who try to imitate what they see in the movies and on TV. I= 'd like to load a bus up with these youngsters and take them to the heart= of LA and turn them loose. The trouble with that is it would be the equ= ivalent of murder. At least half of them would never make it home again. = The rest of them would never be the same. My point is and what we should be writing about when we attempt to portra= y life in the Mormon culture, is everyone in the church, no matter where = they are born or what their heritage is, has to get their own witness and= find their own way back to Father in Heaven. There is no such thing as a= first class round trip ticket. We were all sent here to earth to be tes= ted and each test is specially designed by the Father for the person taki= ng the test. Bill Willson - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:30:56 -0700 From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: [AML] Marden Clark turned 85 (Baby Langford 1), Bessie Clark turns 82 I was cleaning out some old messages [MOD: a year old] and came across this reply to Jonathan Langford from Borenson about new fatherhood (Hey, maybe Binnesman's cure worked after all--I haven't got to the end yet.), and when I looked at the date I realized 13 July is my father's birthday. Born 1916 in the midst of WWI. I was going to announce it on the list but my modem was down for most of July. He's in good health (except for this annoying heart problem, which the doctor says may leave him with about 3 years--and that may have been a year ago. He comes from a family of long lived men--when his great uncle Amasa (lived to be 101, I think, and had his picture on cover of Children's Friend and Ensign several times because he was one of the original primary kids, so he's in the mural in the rock chapel in Farmington) was in the hospital once in his 90s his older brothers came to visit him and he was out of his room--visiting the sick. Dad's uncle Lawrence lived into his 90s and was still irrigating at my father's age and my father is still gardening at the age Uncle Lawrence was still irrigating. But the longevity seems to have skipped my father's generation. His older brothers died in their late 70s or early 80s (Uncle Harlan in the Temple in Johannesberg, where he was the president and had just performed a wedding, and had a heart attack, I think) And then there was Leon who died at about my age when a silo he was climbing burst open and buried him in barley. My father is now about the age his father was when he died, but in much better health, not in an oxygen tent. Tomorrow, Aug. 6, is my mother's 82nd birthday (quite a fireworks display on her 26th). She just read me a story she's working on about a woman passing thru Nevada on the Sabbath (after coming home from her son-in-law's funeral--dead of a heart attack at 60 (similar to my brother-in-law, Bruce Campbell--do we have a motif motivating this thread?) who puts a quarter in a slot machine to reimforce the lesson that gambling is wrong, pulls the handle and as she's walking away hears plink, plink, plink, plink,plink, plink and resists the temptation to turn around and see if she's hit the jackpot. She's in better health than my father--no heart murmur at least, so I hope she doesn't do something foolish like pine away for him (ok, my pun sense demands something like, 'she'll spruce her life back up'). She has outlived all her brothers except Jack/John. Tomorrow is also the Soderborg family reunion ("I don't know how much longer we'll keep having these reunions. Everyone's gone except Jack and me, and the families are getting so big" (and Florence May and George Hyrum Soderborg now have great great grandchildren, that is, their grandchildren are grandparents.) Don's wife, Norma, remarried an 85 year old man. She was looking forward to introducing him at the reunion, but they were hiking in Glacier National Park(?) and he fell off a glacier and met Angela Hopewell, that merciful adversary from Trail of Dreams. I share John Brown's distaste for her, btw, I'd just as soon she didn't show herself again in my family for a while. Harlow S. Clark On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 16:49:49 -0600 "J. Scott Bronson" writes: > > Apologies for this morning's interruption of List posts. > > > Mother and child doing well. > > > > These two items, of course, have nothing whatever to do with each > > other. :^) > > > > Jonathan Langford > > While my wife was in the hospital in labor with our fourth child, I was > making phone calls from her room to finalize details with the program > for the Castle Theatre productions that year. She still talks about it. > > Go be with your wife and baby Jonathan or you'll never hear the end > of it. > > scott - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 20:59:24 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Mission of Mormon Letters? Melissa Proffitt wrote: > I had developed a story that I thought was very strong, about a subject I > cared about, in a genre I love. I discovered that the combination of all > those things created a story that was beyond my ability--beyond my comfort > level--to tell. To do so would have meant immersing myself in a world I > didn't want to be in, without any guarantee that I could eventually pull it > off. It was, in short, a story I decided I didn't want to tell. My > solution was to set it aside. > > Understand that I did not do this lightly. I do not come up with plots > easily and I almost never come up with plots that mean something. I worked > at this for three years before I stopped. Also, it's not the only solution. > Another writer might have found a better way to tell the story; others might > not have worried about the kind of story it was going to be. But as far as > I could tell, it had to be a bloody, dark, twisted tale about some really > evil things, and sanitizing that vision would have meant sacrificing > something really powerful. And I decided I would rather not write it at all > than write something wishy-washy. I fully endorse Melissa's solution. I believe the only two acceptable choices are to tell the story as it should be told, or to not tell the story at all. The second solution is just as artistically viable as the first, if rather painful (as Melissa found out). But to introduce a third alternative--sanitizing--is something to be shunned. Sacrificing the power, creating something wishy-washy--these are things I don't believe an author should do. Either tell the story as it should be told, or don't tell that story. Tell a different story, one that is best told "sanitarily." Don't sanitize ones that need to be told strongly. Leave them for someone who is willing to tackle them, if you're not. - -- 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: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 21:10:34 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Rights Rex Goode wrote: > This is an important question to me as I write about sexually-charged topics > in my novel doing my best to avoid vivid portrayals. I can succeed in the > written word, but if anyone were to make a movie out of it, I'd feel like a > pornographer. I'm not even counting on being published much less making a > movie sale, but I have decisions to make. When you sell your book to the publisher, retain the movie rights. This is something you should do anyway. But that way, you can control who makes the movie and negotiate on how scenes may be portrayed. - -- 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: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:59:40 -0600 From: John Williams Subject: RE: [AML] Editing Literature >> Is there really that big of a difference between a work of art that >> you _see_ and a work of art that you _taste_? > >Not at all -- if you own an original. Once you purchase a work of >art, you have the right to do with it as you please. If you were to >somehow purchase the Mona Lisa from the Louve, you could choose to >burn it. When you purchase the bacon-wrapped fillet mignon, you get >an original creation, and you can choose to put catsup or A-1 sauce on >it, despite the looks of disgust you'll get from your fellow patrons, >the servers, and possibly the chef. > >Now books differ in a way because you haven't really purchased the >original. Instead, you own a single user license. You can use your >copy in any way approved by your license. In this case, the local and >federal copyright laws define the license. You can write in, >mutilate, or burn your copy of the book, but you cannot choose to make >a duplicate copy and sell that copy to someone else. I'm confused about what you mean by "original creation." Could you please clarify? How do I own the "original" fillet mignon, but not the "original" book? And how does "owning the original" and "NOT owning the original" produce exactly the same results? In the first paragraph: I own the "original" creation, therefore I can put catsup, A-1 sauce, or whatever on it-- edit as I please. In the second paragraph: I do not own the "original" creation, therefore I can write in it, burn it, mutilate it or whatever--edit as I please. What's the difference? It seems to me like you are actually proving my point--or that we actually agree and are merely arguing about he appropriateness of the metaphor. Again, my point: In the same way that people are allowed (or at least not frowned upon) to "edit" recipes according to their personal tastes and sensitivities, so should they be allowed to edit their own movies/literature according to their own tastes and sensitivities. That's it. >but you cannot choose to make a duplicate copy and sell that copy to someone else. I don't remember suggesting that one should. - --John - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 22:49:41 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Sex in Literature Alan Rex Mitchell wrote: > Also, I like him because Brigham was a man > who was not dominated by his sexual desires. With 47 wives, he probably didn't have enough sexual desire left to dominate a flea. - -- 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: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 23:15:22 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Writing About "Good" Mormons REWIGHT wrote: > > [Me:] In the world of Jack Weyland, the > > Mormon boy meets a non-Mormon girl, and literally days later, she's > > taking the discussions from the missionaries. Of course she ends up > > baptized. This just doesn't happen in real life. > It happens all the time. > > I was baptised three weeks after my first initial contact with the > missionaries. I never drank, smoked, and at the time, I was a 17 year old > virgin. > > Does that make me unbelievable? Everything about you is unbelievable, Annie-poo! And no, I don't know myself what I meant by that cryptic retort. I just got off a two-week vacation with the family. Give me a break. Ever since making the above comment, everyone's been writing in about exceptions to my rule. So I guess I have to qualify it. In the real world of billions of people, all sorts of bizarre things can and do happen. But as a percentage of the population, they are extremely rare events, almost to the point of nonexistence. All the anecdotes to the contrary notwithstanding, I say that it just doesn't happen that teens and college age kids start taking Mormon missionary discussions literally days after meeting a member of the opposite sex they have an at-first-sight attraction to. Anna, your story doesn't even qualify because you said three weeks after meeting the missionaries, not three days after meeting a boy you liked. I know some people, after meeting the missionaries, get converted quickly. That's where the term "golden contact" came from. But for a boy in a romance situation to foist missionary lessons on a brand new potential girlfriend days after meeting her? Who are these weird people? I wouldn't have been so crass in my youth. Talk about pushy! But that's precisely what happened over and over again in a collection of Jack Weyland short stories I read a few months ago. It happened with such clockwork regularity that you'd think one of the Newtonian laws of motion you learn about in physics is "Girls who meet Mormon boys take missionary discussions three days later." THIS JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN IN REAL LIFE! - -- 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: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 09:47:51 -0700 From: Terri Reid Subject: [AML] Welcome to My Living Room [MOD: Amen, sister. Amen.] The other day I got a message from a list member who thought I was offended by something that they had written. So, I wondered if I might have inadvertently sent a wrong "message" to the group. The way I picture this group is like a big group of folks sitting around my living room. We're all comfortable on chairs, on the floor - wherever you'd like to sit - and we're just discussing this wonderful art of ours, writing. And sometimes I'll be nodding my head - yes, I totally agree with that (except because it's cyber, you can't see me) and sometimes I'll think - - no, I don't quite agree with that and then I'll add my two cents. And perhaps, because you can't see the grin, my subtle(?) idea of humor doesn't quite come across. So, sorry if any of the messages I've sent have come across have been offensive or seemed as if I were offended - I'm pretty thick skinned. And thank you all for letting me sit with you in my living room! Terri Terri Reid Executive Producer - Midwest Region PIXELight www.itpnow.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:05:17 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Audience for Mormon Lit - ---Original Message From: Terri Reid > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacob Proffitt [SMTP:Jacob@Proffitt.com] > >> "So what's with the men? Chris Heimerdinger has shown that >> you can make a living writing adventure stories. Older men >> just aren't an audience, though. In looking around my ward, >> I think I have something of a reason. Our men are busy. >> Please don't take this as a "men work harder than women" >> because that isn't it at all. What I mean is that men tend >> to over schedule their time. In my opinion, this is a bad >> thing and something our culture needs to come to grips with. >> It seems to me that a man who has free time in the evenings >> will tend to fill that time up with something--work, extra >> job training, a second job, or home repairs. Men seem to go >> out of their way to make sure that they have no time alone or >> inactive. If we rest at all, it tends to be something that >> is in some way social--a softball game, a movie, possibly TV. >> Our reading is utilitarian and tends to include >> informational work either for work or church. Do we feel >> guilty having solitary leisure? We'll go to a movie, but >> it's a date. We'll watch TV, but that is "family time". >> We'll go to ward softball, but that is a church activity. I >> don't see any non-social leisure time in the men around me in >> my ward." > > I have to totally disagree on this one. My husband and my > son-in-law are > avid readers (too avid) and they read all kinds of fiction . > I just ran to > his office to pick up some of the latest authors he's been > reading: Clive > Cussler, Robert Ludlum, David Eddings, David Gemmell, Stephen > Hunter, Noel > Hynd... The list goes on. He loves to read. And, > coincidentally, my > daughter just dropped by to pick something up. My son-in-law > stayed in the > car because he was finishing a book - last chapter - I > totally understand! Well, since I'm only giving my impression based on my observations, I can't offer anything more than my already stated anecdotal evidence to counter your anecdotal evidence. I admit that I'm generalizing based on what I see in Deseret Book. I could be way wrong, but it looks to me, based on what I see when I go there, like men are not reading LDS fiction. My paragraph above is my attempt to postulate a reason for this with the assumption that my observation is true. It's a hypothesis based on an assumption based on an observation. Not something I'd take for gospel truth. The reason I wrote about it at all is to see if my hypothesis is countered or reinforced by anyone else's experience. Ideally, I'd hope that some of the subscribed publishers could enlighten me with actual statistics or marketing studies. Or anyone else who has actual evidence for the reading habits of LDS men (or any other LDS demographics we might have). I was struck by the imbalance and I think that it could be based on evidence of buying patterns. It could help explain why the Missionary Novel seems to be doomed for example. Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 17:19:01 EDT From: BISH8@aol.com Subject: [AML] re: Introductions: Paul Bishop Thanks to all the warm welcomes to the list. In answer to Terri Reed's questions - 1) They keep threatening to make me Bishop Bishop, but it hasn't happend yet -- possibly because my roots are to deep in the Laihona camp. 2) So far I have not used 'Mormon characters' in my fiction, although I have always been intrigued to try a series of mysteries where the main character is a Mormon Bishop to compete with all the Jewish rabbi, Catholic priests, and nuns who are already an established part of the mainstream mystery genre. 3) When I started writing I was only concerned with telling a good story. I was too inexperienced to worry about deeper meaning without sounding as if I was on a soapbox. As I have grown as a writer and honed my skills, the deeper meaning to stories has emerged as a concern. I am now more aware of the messages I'm sending and approach the writing accordingly. I believe my job as a writer is to entertain a reader. My goal, however, is to make the reader think. If I can accomplish both, then I've been fully successful. 4) Writing for an established television show, however, is entirely different. There are so many people with input into your writing, that any deeper message gets rung out before the second draft. Had some good news last week. Warner books has asked me to write two true crime books. The bad news is they want them yesterday. I'm trying to get some wiggle room from them while I complete a screenplay from a novel that I believe has great potential. I was pounding away at it all weekend, and see it begining to take shape. Paul Bishop - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:23:40 -0700 From: Terri Reid Subject: RE: [AML] Editing Literature I remember a TV show - about 15 years ago - that starred Robert Urich as a detective. I really liked the show. Then in one episode his girlfriend became pregnant and the conclusion at the end of the show was that she got an abortion. I never watched the show again. Did it make the show go away? No, it lasted a couple more seasons. Did anyone at the network know that I was doing it? No, but now I am sure to write letters and let them know. Did I feel better about my decision to boycott it? Yep, I sure did. Now, perhaps if enough people voted with their money - through not buying a video, not going to a movie, not watching a TV show - perhaps then, Hollywood would get the message. Because Hollywood is not interested in art - Hollywood is interested in money. Terri Terri Reid Executive Producer - Midwest Region PIXELight www.itpnow.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:24:56 -0600 From: Terry L Jeffress Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Use of Language On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 12:26:49PM -0400, Amelia Parkin wrote: > The thing I really want to get at is how difficult it is to create > something strange and unusual--whether it be in word or in paint or > in whatever medium. I think we need to allow new art forms the > opportunity to speak to us on their own terms, rather than to > project terms onto them--terms by which we demand they speak but by > which they do not speak and may never speak. But "strange and unusual" work doesn't necessarily become accepted and usual. I certainly advocate openness when looking at new forms of art, but I also reserve the right to brand that art with my own opinion -- couched in my own terms. Anyone who walks through a college or university fine arts building can see numerous examples of strange and unusual art. In most cases, these artists never gain world acclaim or even local fame. Most attempts at new art fail miserably -- and rightly so. > This is even more difficult when it comes to literary arts. We have > higher demands of literature when it comes to making sense. We > expect words and sentences to function in a certain way--to convey > meaning. And when they do not, it is even more of an affront than > when a painting is not only unrealistic but also completely > non-representational. We must also look at the level of investment. When I look at a new painting, I usually make up my mind in three or four seconds whether to keep looking or move on to the next painting. I don't have to spend very much time with works that I don't like. With literature, you must invest much more time to even begin to decide if you like the work or not. When I read, I want to feel that I have spent my time profitably. > Of course, this is a bit of a two-edged sword. Language is like > that. Because we all use it and because it is a common tool, we > expect that we can understand it. But when someone creates > something that doesn't use language according to its own > rules--radically does not--we tend to recognize how difficult that > is (I'm thinking of Joyce's _Finnigan's Wake_) and acclaim it as > genius. I think you have confused the rules of language with the forms of literature. When Joyce wrote a sentence, the subject still doesn't the acting, the verb describes the action, and the subject and verb still match in number. Joyce didn't create any new language, but he did create some new literary forms. He developed his characters and plots in ways that others had not used in the past. Your comment still applies -- we do expect certain literary forms when we read -- but I still expect sentences to follow grammar and syntax rules. > Plastic arts on the other hand--and I mean painting in particular > although the same is partially true of sculpture, performance art, > etc.--is a language, a tool we don't all understand. And so when > the result of using that tool looks nonsensical and easy we dismiss > it as something anyone, even a two-year-old could create. Knowing > language as intimately as we do both enables us and makes us > critical when someone seems to use it poorly and reveals our own > inabilities and leaves us reverential when we realize we can't use > it anywhere near as well as a literary artist. I have often heard the comment that modern metal music has nothing but a bunch of guys screaming and playing random guitar chords. It might even seem like these metal artists do not have any real talent -- until you hear a band of high-school kids trying to cover a hit metal song. You then realize that even though you find metal music obnoxious, that the group had quite a lot of talent. Recently I have come across the term "unconscious incompetence." This describes a state where we don't know enough about a subject to even understand that we don't know anything about the subject. As you said, because we all use language (and I'll add that we all have read stories), many people assume that one can simply string together some words to create a new story. Usually after our first few attempts at writing, we move into "conscious incompetence" -- we recognize that we do not have the skills needed to write. A few people persevere, and keep working at writing and move into "conscious competence" -- they have developed the skills needed and can consciously produce good writing. When looking at some works of art, or even some written works, I have to admit my conscious incompetence -- I do not have the skills or training to fully appreciate the works. But competence in art or language does not necessarily guarantee acceptance of a work. I consider myself fairly well versed in literature, and yet all literature does not create a pleasing result. For example, you can find many rave reviews about E. Annie Proulx. I cannot stand her works. She writes fine, grammatical sentences, but her work as a whole leaves me asking, "So what?" Why did you want me to invest the time to read a 300-page character sketch that goes absolutely nowhere? Perhaps I should look at the 300-page character sketch as something "strange and unusual" and allow it to speak to me in its own terms. As some list members can attest to, I want to give every work its chance in the sun. I made several of my friends sit through just about the worst movie ever made because I knew that by seeing the whole, we could make sense out of the disorganized and unsatisfying scenes. Instead, we ended up having to sit through an entirely unsatisfying movie. I don't think any amount of openness will change my opinion in this case. No matter what art form you choose, the majority of experimental art will fail. Occasionally, a new form of art does gain popularity, but it must rise from the ashes of the thousands of works that crashed and burned all around it. We certainly should attempt to keep an open mind so we can accept and praise the new works of genius -- but we also have to accept that a quest for the next new thing will probably leave us with a lot of bad experiences. Scott Parkin has said that he has yet to read any truly satisfying Mormon novels. We could accuse Scott of having a closed mind -- of not accepting the strange and unusual. But I also have to invoke William Morris who said that Mormon literature cannot just abandon the traditions of Western literature. We have steeped in the forms of Western literature all our lives -- a Mormon literature might eventually evolve into something entirely unique, but for the time being, we have to judge our literature with the tools we have at hand. And using those tools, Mormon literature has not yet produced a _War and Peace_, a _Hamlet_, a _Lolita_, or even a _Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance_. I don't believe that Scott has closed his mind, but rather, he has judged Mormon literature against a background of works that provide that substantial satisfaction that lasts long beyond the actual reading of the text -- that feature of literature that Kenneth Burke calls "equipment for living." I certainly accept the possibility that I should keep my mind open when I encounter something that seems to buck against the accepted forms of contemporary literature, but we also have to accept the fact that forms exist because they work. And if we want to have our own people reading the literature we create, then we probably should stick to those forms. - -- Terry L Jeffress | However great a man's natural talent may | be, the art of writing cannot be learned | all at once. -- Jean Jacques Rousseau - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:26:48 -0600 From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: Re: [AML] Introductions: Paul Bishop (Okay, I just have to ask - have you ever been - a bishop? And did they call you Bishop Bishop?) ;) I knew a Bishop Bishop once. I also met a pair of missionaries, Christopher Meek and Frederick Humble. You know, Elder Humble and Elder Meek (a true story). 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: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:15:39 -0400 From: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: [AML] Fw: MN News Briefs: Kent Larsen (Edited) News Briefs Irish Reviewer Likes BYU International Folk Dancers DUBLIN, IRELAND -- A reviewer for Dublin's Irish Times loved the BYU International Folk Dance Ensemble's performance, saying that "the standing ovation for the International Folk Dance Ensemble on Monday was entirely justified by the stunning second half." Reviewer Carolyn Swift was impressed by the superb costumes and dances and the second-half Croatian, Hungarian and Ukranian dances. However, she believes that many people left after the "overlong, repetitive and very noisy first half," which included a Celtic section with a Welsh clog dance, a Scottish lilt, the Irish six-hand reel and the Keltatak, which Swift says was "unwisely likened to Riverdance." Overall, she says, the Celtic section seemed a paraody, "bringing back memories of Maureen Potter's send-ups of Irish dancing." Reviews: International Folk Dance Ensemble Dublin Ireland Irish Times 1Aug01 A3 http://www.ireland.com:80/newspaper/features/2001/0801/fea4.htm By Carolyn Swift Controversial Video Editing Clubs Appear in Northern Utah LAYTON, UTAH -- The controversial video-editing clubs that have become popular in Utah county, Utah, allowing the predominantly-LDS audience to see R an PG-13 movies without the objectionable scenes, have now moved to northern Utah thanks to the efforts of BYU student Brian Schenk. With his brother, Braxton, Schenk opened Clean Cut Videos and more than 70 families joined the group in its first week. Schenk says he was inspired by Ray Lines, owner of the three CleanFlicks video clubs in Utah County. The Schenks hope to offer more titles soon -- they don't yet have as many as Lines does -- and want to expand, opening more stores along the Wasatch Front. The businesses say they can offer edited movies because they own the videos and aren't technically renting them to customers, "We as a club own the titles and can edit them," Brian Schenk said. Without that technicality, editing the movies would violate the copyright law. But Salt Lake copyright attorney Randall B. Bateman says the law is ambiguous on the issue, "Technically you can do whatever you want to your own copies," he said. But when a group owns the videos, its not as clear. He says a court case will be needed to interpret the law, but that he doesn't know of a video club that has been brought to court for the practice. Video club offers edited entertainment Ogden UT Standard-Examiner 3Aug01 B2 http://www.standard.net/standard/news/news_story.html?sid=000108022321168652 43+cat=news+template=news1.html By Loretta Park: Standard-Examiner Davis Bureau Layton shop caters to those who seek R-, or PG-13-free shows >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/ - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:17:42 +1000 From: "helena.chester" Subject: [AML] BATCHELOR et al., _Voices in Harmony_ (Query) I'm contemplating ordering the book, "Voices in Harmony-Contemporary Women Celebrate Plural Marriage Authors and Compilers: Mary Batchelor * Marianne Watson * Anne Wilde. NEW BOOK released December 1, 2000-- http://www.principlevoices.com/ Has anyone on the list read it, and can give some personal thoughts on it. Helena Chester - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 07:54:24 -0600 From: "Paris ANDERSON" Subject: Re: [AML] Granite Publishing Query I'm surprised this is the first I've heard ask about Granite on this list. The Head man's name is Jeff Lambson. He is the one great universal cool. I would trust him long before I would trust anyone I've ever met in this business. They are just normal publishers--not vanity or anything. Their focus is regional (LDS) and anything related or that shows promise. I would have a contract with them if they didn't have this one, single, solitary flaw. For some reason they aren't able to see the brilliance of my work (which really, really is truely wonderful and enlightening. The word magnificent come to mind.) No, but honestly--that's the place to be if you can work it out. I'll forward your letter to them. By the way . . . Granite is located it Orem, not Salt Lake. Paris Anderson - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 09:06:49 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Fw: MN New AP Stylebook Still Recommends "MormonChurch": Steve wrote: > on 8/3/01 12:49 PM, Barbara Hume at barbara@techvoice.com wrote: > > > Well, we've been called worse things than Mormons. > > True. > > >The name "Church of > > Jesus Christ" doesn't work for me because it sounds like a Protestant > > denomination. > > But, since it came from his own lips as the proper name of the church.... > > :-) Let me wax technical here. He said the church must be after his name. The first name of the Church was the Church of Christ, as a matter of fact, without the name of Jesus inserted. Then, in Kirtland, it became the Church of the Latter-day Saints, without the Jesus OR Christ in the name at all. But let it be understood that the above suggestion of the "Church of Jesus Christ" isn't an official name change, only a suggestion to media folks as a way to refer to the church once they've identified it as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the first instance. Thom - - 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 #417 ******************************