From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #509 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 Thursday, November 8 2001 Volume 01 : Number 509 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:34:30 -0800 (PST) From: Darlene Young Subject: Re: [AML] Writer's Conference I: LDS Publishers =93Darlene Young looks like a young teenager=94???!!!!!=20 AGGGGGHH! I was so glad when I hit 30 because then I could really say I was a grownup. But it does no good if no one believes you. (When I student-taught, the librarian kept asking for my hall pass.) I guess it=92s a further sign of my youth that I care so much.=20 Anyway, they say someday I will be glad I look this young. Believe it or not, my husband looks even younger. He has a hard time convincing his patients that yes, he IS the doctor and no, the doctor didn=92t send his son in to practice for him today. =20 Here are some various and rambling jottings from my notes of the writer=92s conference. Some are summary, some are observations. I. =93How to Get Published with LDS Publishers.=94 Wish the speakers had addressed this topic more instead of just giving overviews of their businesses=97also, I would have liked to see more focus on fiction--but what can you do in just 10 minutes? A. Deseret Book, Cory Maxwell They have 4 imprints. Key people: 1. Bookcraft, Emily Watts. 2. Deseret Book, Cory Maxwell. 3. Shadow Mountain, Sheri Dew. 4. Eagle Gate, Jana Erickson. See their pamphlet for the descriptions of these. The pamphlet also includes advice for writers=97stuff like =93write well, be original, research thoroughly.=94 They look for manuscripts that have value to the readers (are you a better person for having read it?=20 Can it make money?), are well-written and researched, and are unique. Cory said, =93We WILL take risks when marketability is in question IF the book is extremely well-written.=94 I=92m wondering: does this apply to fiction? My guess is that it doesn=92t. DB accepts 8-10 novels a year. B. Covenant, Tyler Moulton.=20 Covenant has no desire to go national. Books are for this market only. Children=92s books should be explicitly LDS. He praised one author who, when her children=92s manuscript was rejected, got her own artist to produce 10 paintings and then returned to Covenant=97and was accepted. (This was a really depressing example to me.) I asked Tyler later about whether Covenant has ever or will ever do short story collections or poetry. Has answer, summed up, was no. C. Cedar Fort, Lee Nelson. Talked about the author participation program.=20 Authors fork out about $2900. =20 D. Cornerstone, Richard Hopkins. Spoke for a while about the legal troubles the company has had. In speaking with other participants later (who shall remain nameless here), I got the feeling that the legal problems are more extensive and have a greater effect on Cornerstone=92s authors than Richard seemed to imply. Richard did say that all current authors will be paid, honored, etc. And, once troubles are resolved, they hope to be back to business as usual. However, first-time authors are currently very low on the list. In fiction, Cornerstone is looking for corssover potential. They like books that are written =93like a New York Times bestseller, only with Mormon elements=94=97focus should not be on being LDS. Something like Chaim Potok: a specific cultural setting but with universal themes. E. American Book Publishing, sorry, forgot her name. Passed out a pamphlet. My notes say, =93Who are these people?=94 Apparently, they have a huge staff=97lots of editors, marketers, etc. Didn=92t mention how they sell or where. I found out later that they sell from a website. Pamphlet says they have 4 imprints: 1. American Book Classics: =93Whether these titles involve biographies, records of inspirational and impassioned works, or noteworthy storytelling, these treasures create lasting memories.=94 2. American University & Colleges Press: scholarly works. 3. American Book Business Press: =93 . . . for executives, entrepreneurs, and professionals.=94 4. Bedside Books: =93superior original contemporary fiction in a varitey of genres including mysteries, thrillers, romance, science fiction and historical novels.=94 5. Millenial Mind Publishing: =93fresh views about the people, sprituality, and issues that shape our lives today.=94 I see that this is getting long. I=92ll put my notes from other classes into separate posts. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:36:07 -0800 (PST) From: Darlene Young Subject: Re: [AML] Writer's Conference II: Kemp and Dutcher II. Kenny Kemp Recommends Writer=92s Digest Competitions. Talked about how cool it was to talk to editors who earlier had rejected his manuscript AFTER he won the competition and got a contract. One editor, when asked what had happened to his manuscript the first time he sent it, researched and reported that it had been =93shredded unopened.=94 =93What a relief!=94 said Kenny, =93I thought you had rejected it on its merits.=94 Suggestions from Kenny=92s editor and agent on writing for a national audience: 1. Say something new. 2. Make it a pleasure to read. Invisible prose. 3. Metaphor and symbol. 4. Be well-read. Read the classics and other books in your genre. (You can=92t write a family story without having read Brothers Karamazov.) 5. Respect your audience. 6. Have an emotional center but be subtle. =93If your characters cry, your audience won=92t.=94 7. Universal theme. For example, Fiddler on the Roof is NOT about Orthodox Judaism. Asher Lev isn=92t about being Jewish but about being an artist. But bury your big idea deep. Story is most important. Jesus Christ, the best storyteller: 1. Simple idea, universal. 2. Avoid cultural specificity. 3. Share important doctrine (repent). 4. Metaphor and symbol. Idea: Find a book similar to the one you=92re writing.=20 Call its publisher and ask for the name of that author=92s agent. Call the agent and ask if you can send a letter. Then follow up. III. Richard Dutcher I didn=92t take a lot of notes on this one because I just sat there enjoying it. Two things that caught my attention: 1. (Some other listers have already mentioned this one.) In response to my question about whether he has experienced a response of indignation to his work, Richard joked about realizing that he is never going to be made bishop. But so what? In any ward there are many people who can be the R. S. president, but there is no one else that can write what you have inside of you. You will be held accountable for what you do with your writing talent. (Other people can=92t do it.) 2. Nan asked if he used Richard Bushman for background research on his new movie. He said yes because he found Bushman to be very reliable=97he (Bushman) doesn=92t just omit problematic moments in history but rather addresses them fairly. It=92s hard to trust historians who just leave things out. Other various and sundry: No date of release on this next one=97maybe spring of 2003. No immediate plans to release his other movies in other countries; it=92s a bad idea to market your own movie overseas because there=92s no guarantee of getting paid. Didn=92t have a date on when Brigham City will be on video. Mormon filmmakers make money in the theaters, not off of videos. Doesn=92t anticipate that Brigham City will be released again in Salt Lake. Won=92t tell us which character he=92s playing in the Joseph Smith movie, but it isn=92t Joseph Smith. Elders Haight and Holland have expressed approval: =93Keep doing what you=92re doing.=94=20 Doesn=92t anticipate being able to do anyone else=92s scripts for many, many years=97busy with his own. But he would like to be able to help with some sort of a clearinghouse of noteworthy scripts for producers to look at. Just for information, at the end of Dutcher=92s other session he recommended two articles that Mormon artists ought to read: =93Gospel and the Arts=94 by Spencer W. Kimball in the July 1977 Ensign and =93Filling the World with Truth=94 by Elder Ballard in the July 1976 or 1977 Ensign. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:44:03 -0800 (PST) From: Darlene Young Subject: Re: [AML] Writ. Conf. III: Ken Rand and Todd Petersen IV. Ken Rand, “Where Ideas Come From and How to Get Them.” Ken had a great handout and an extensive bibliography. The focus of his presentation was on how we can get our left brains to shut down while our right brains feed us ideas. He suggests things like doing something monotonous (driving, exercising) to keep the left brains busy while we generate ideas. Fast writing is good. Get it all down. Ken talked about something he calls “subject-verb-object” that he uses to generate ideas. He takes random subjects, verbs and objects, then brainstorms about them. He demonstrated by having a class member give him three random words (“shirt,” “lay,” “mind”), set the timer for 90 seconds, and just poured out a storm of ideas that could eventually be a story. Amazing! You would have to use a tape recorder for this kind of thing. It’s a good idea to go to sleep with your idea and let your subconscious work on it. Ken’s editor (?) said he needed to work on grounding the reader in setting more, so he tries to get 4 of 5 senses involved every two pages. FINISH your work first. Then go back and edit. Ken’s next class was on how to let the left brain back into the process (editing and rewriting), but since editing is the one thing I can do well, I didn’t stay for that class. I asked how the “finish it first” idea applies to novel writing and he answered that when it comes to novels, the trick is to outline, outline, and then outline. If you’re having trouble, outline more. Even write three different outlines and choose the best one. Put more words into your outline instead of your book until you feel ready. V. Todd Petersen, “Outsider on the Inside.” I have to admit, I somehow got lost during this discussion. I honestly think I missed the point. I’d love to hear Todd summarize it himself. But here’s what I got: Todd spoke of his experience working for Cimmarron Review. (Small literary journals are, by the way, where agents look to see what’s happening.) Editors of such literary magazines run the other way if they sense anything to do with a Christian (not just Mormon) church in a story. Todd described three different types of stories with Mormon elements and why they were all rejected. (One ended up being accepted after all, and Todd tried to explain why it was different.) He recommends that if you want to be published in one of these things, you should pour in a lot of other stuff that takes the focus off of the churchiness. For example, a story of Christian women making Christmas cookies in Iran worked. Avoid like crazy anything that can sound like propaganda. Then Todd began discussing Mormon themes that he feels can go into stories without being offensive. We listed some. (The idea of the telestial, a world at war with itself. The idea that humans are gods in embryo.) And here’s where I got confused. Is Todd saying, “Here are some ways that we can get people to ask religious questions through our work without being overtly preachy”? I THINK that’s what he was getting at. Please help, Todd. ===== Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 14:41:03 -0700 From: Terry L Jeffress Subject: Re: [AML] Fluff On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 06:52:15PM -0600, REWIGHT wrote: > I liked seminary donuts. Only when someone else had to buy them. Otherwise, I had to get up almost an hour early to stop by Dunkin Donuts before early morning seminary. > As a writer, I am getting terrified of you people. I can see that > whatever I write, if it does get published, will be taken and torn > apart, called 'fluff' or worse "spiritual pornography." Because it > seems some people on this list are in the persuit of finding > perfection. And it must be perfect to them. Don't let academic discussions about the artistic value of various works discourage you from writing. No matter what you write, someone will like it, someone else will hate it, and a lot of other people will never read it. If you publish a work in the Mormon market, you stand a good chance of having that book reviewed here on the list. Although I too would have some anticipation about having my work reviewed here, I would look forward to the free advice that I would receive. On "perfection." Well, I can only speak for myself. I don't expect perfection, but I do expect a good effort. To take a recent example, _The Miracle Life of Edgar Mint_ shows an author who took the time to create a wonderful tone and narrative. The word choice develops the setting, the setting enhances the characters, the characters actions exhibit the themes. . . . In other words, all the narrative aspects of the story -- characterization, setting, theme, plot, word choice, etc. -- all work in an inseparable, synergistic means to create the story of Edgar Mint. Some genius authors might have the ability to create this level of interaction off the top of their heads, but I usually will credit the author with hard work. To me, _Edgar Mint_ shows the author's great effort to create a work of literature. Contrast that with the current Covenant book in by backpack. Clearly the author took a lot of time writing the story, but the elements of the story don't work as synergistically as in _Edgar Mint_. The author missed a lot of opportunities for characterization, and his word choice goes beyond invisible prose -- instead he creates empty prose -- just words on paper. In a lot of cases, the author repeats information you don't need. For example, in a scene where the main character visits a prison and takes a tour, the author refers to "the correctional officer who was escorting them." Look at all these wasted words. The author has already establish that the protagonist has taken a tour guided by a correctional officer, why not just say "their guide" or "their escort" or "the officer"? To me this shows disdain for the reader. The author does not care that he continually slows down the narrative with all these extra words that impede the reader's progress. In other words, I think the author did not make the effort to learn the craft of writing and deserves to have that pointed out in a review. (And some editor should receive a severe slap to the knuckles with a ruler for leaving so much unnecessary text in place. And for allowing a twenty-two year old prison inmate to say, "Good grief." I understand not wanting the swear word the character would have really used in the text, but this anachronistic substitute made me groan.) > So if I write a scene that I might have been inspired to write, and > if it touches someone, I'm fine, until it doesn't touch someone > else. Then it's labled spiritual pornography. I haven't seen anyone associating not touching a reader with fluff. Not touching the reader means the reader does not belong to your audience. In the discussion of fluff, I saw people taking an exception to material that purposely put the gospel in a simple light or trivializes some important aspects of the gospel or church history. I believe that authors can receive an inspiration from the Lord for their writing. But unless the Lord had the spirit dictate to you word-for-word, you probably still have a lot of work getting that scene down on paper. I know that I often get visual and not verbal prompting, so I would have to translate that visual image into words. And still, I doubt that I could imbue that scene with the full impact of the vision that created it. When Nephi says that he lacks the ability to write the full depth of his experience, I think he often refers to this aspect of trying to convert a spiritual message from one format to another. > I'm not talking about likes or dislikes here. And I'm not talking > about judging the artists work. I'm talking about judging the artist > himself. Is that what we're doing here when we put labels on other > people's work? And yet, judging an artist's work comes down to whether or not the work created an enjoyable experience. Did we like the work. The entire realm of Literary Criticism (in my opinion) exists to provide tools for the reader to analyze the effect the work produced. Criticism gives me the vocabulary to discuss the points that worked and the points that didn't work. (Of course, a whole school of criticism exists that judges works by how they fit into certain political framework, but I don't really care about how well a work expresses Marxist views or the views of any other political agenda.) So if you sent me a work to review, I doubt very much that I would label you -- the artist -- as immoral. I have read a lot of books where the protagonists have sex outside the bonds of marriage, but I do not necessarily label the author's or even the works as immoral. I just have to recognize that the author and the characters belong to another worldview, but that view doesn't really challenge my own. I would review your work based on the word you assembled, and at most I might label you as lazy for not taking the time to create interesting prose. In the end, if you want to write, you should just write. Don't think about the great message you want to produce. Don't think about what the critics will say about your writing. Don't think about what your mother or your bishop will say about your writing. Just write the stories inside you. Listening to all those voice will just get in your way and keep you from producing your best efforts. - -- Terry Jeffress | The truth is that Simple English is no- | one's mother tongue. It has to be worked AML Webmaster and | for. -- Jacques Barzun AML-List Review Archivist | - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:32:56 -0700 From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] God's Face (was: God in Fiction) On Mon, 05 Nov 2001 16:52:41 -0700 "ROY SCHMIDT" writes: > Scott wrote: > > Here's the question: Why does Satan get a "face" in Scott's books > if God does not? > > Roy replies: Maybe for the same reason that Jim Christianson chose > not to put a face on Jesus in his painting of Christ in Gethsemane. > he explained that whatever faced he used would not satisfy how YOU > believe Christ looks. Card not giving God a face makes perfect sense > to me, particularly in this context. It would to me too I guess except that the same should be true of Satan's face too shouldn't it? Why is no one concerned with whether or not I'm satisfied with how Satan is depicted? I just want equal time is all. scott - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 13:42:54 -0500 From: Tony Markham Subject: [AML] Dealing with Criticism (was: Fluff) Because we are all sensitive artists and want our work to be accepted in the same spirit in which it has been written and are, therefore crushed by harsh judgments and terrified into ennui, I offer this lyric from an old rock and roll song that has been a constant source of comfort to me since I first heard it. May it help some of you deal with criticism as well: "When you lay your life down in those grooves, you know, you're bound to get scratched up sometime." ("Real Man," Todd Rundgren _Initiation_) Tony Markham - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 11:44:57 -0700 From: "Benson Parkinson" Subject: Re: [AML] ALLRED, "For the Strength of the Hills" / CLAWSON, _YankeeStory_ Marilyn Brown wrote: <<<<<<< At first I thought Benson was stuttering. But then--wow, Benson, what a STORY! I really had no idea you had such a history. Maybe it's just me, but I think this is SUCH INTERSTING STUFF! (I guess I'm the one who usually picks up on the unknown blood, gore and torture of our people of so many years ago. But I had no idea all of this was in your background! Does it come out in any of your novels that I've missed? Marilyn Brown >>>>>>> Stuttering? From the g-g-grandpas maybe? That's the convention in family = history. (I wish I had as good a shorthand for cousins. I've got family = projects going that keep me in touch with first, second, third, and fourth = cousins, once, twice, and three times removed in both directions, ranging i= n= age from 0 to 97. I'm always meeting with someone or talking with someone = on the phone about photos or stories, and my kids says, "Who's that?" and I= = say, "That's our cousins." They never know how impressed to be--one of my = pioneer ancestors has 19,000 known descendants. A significant portion of th= e= citizenry of Utah is my cousin.) I experimented with putting fictionalized family history in the Malan = Rignell chapter in _The MTC: Set Apart_ and one or two unpublished chapters= = of the missionary series, and I've written chapters on a modern retelling o= =66= Jacob's story that draw heavily on the technique. You've got to do it = right. It's not just a matter of making historical fiction or a period piec= e= or lending color, but of giving a sense of the shape of the world with you= r= family around you, living and dead. This is what I want to develop when I = return to fiction. But my real book comes first, and that's the family one.= = (Well-written family history is on a higher plane than fiction anyhow. = "Well-written" here doesn't have much to do with traditional literary = qualities.) Ben Parkinson - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= - --- THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL(S) TO WHOM IT I= S= ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL = AND/OR EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. If you are not the = intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering the message to the = intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, = distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If = you have received this message in error or there are any problems, please = notify the sender immediately. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor= = any affiliated entity is liable for direct, special, indirect or = consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of this = message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 11:01:40 -0800 From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Talmage Biography? I thought the book by Signature, which I reviewed some time ago, was excellent. Very complete, very honest. I think it was called "The Teaching of James E. Talmadge." At 06:28 PM 11/6/01 -0500, you wrote: >Can anyone recommend--or even name--a good biography of James E. Talmadge? > >Thank you. > >Kurt Weiland. > > > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 09:52:41 -0700 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Credit/Blame in Drama, Movies >The question of the ages. Why, indeed, would so many people=20 > commit so much time and energy to make such a worthless movie? I=20 > watch something like "Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2," or=20 > "Battlefield Earth" or (heaven help us) "Freddy Got Fingered," and=20 > think: Is this what you MEANT to do? Is this what you wanted? Is this=20 > what you had in mind? To throw this kind of incompetent ugliness up=20 > on the screen? I don't get it. William Goldman has a great answer to this question, which adds up to, = basically, nobody knows nothin'. It's very easy, in retrospect, to look = at a film and wonder what on earth they were thinking. But in fact, while = you're in the middle of shooting something, fighting weather, ego and = technical problems (the three constants on every movie set ever), it's = very easy to get all caught up in getting the lighting on that shot = exactly right, and forgetting what tripe the actors are allowing to come = out of their mouths. =20 Fact is, while it was in production, everyone on the set of Jaws was = filled with horrible foreboding. I was reading about it the other day. = The director (a kid named Spielberg) seemed completely clueless, one of = the leading actors was a drunk, they were way behind schedule and way over = budget, nobody thought much of the script, and the shark didn't work. And = what came out of the editing room is a classic of American cinema, and one = of the great scary movies ever. And I've read probably twenty people who = have talked about the single most congenial, enjoyable, trouble-free movie = set ever, a film that, while they were working on it, everyone just knew = was going to be a magical, lyrical, gorgeous, groundbreaking piece of = cinema: the Bo Derek Tarzan movie. =20 Nobody knows nothin'. Words to live by. I just saw it last night, as a = matter of fact. We have a student filmmaker who had this script he'd = written which I thought was lousy. My colleagues in the film department = all read it and all agreed; one of the worst student scripts we'd seen in = awhile. The kid who wrote it kept saying he wanted to shoot it as it was, = and we unanimously told him it wouldn't work, and that he was wasting his = time and money, and that he needed to re-write it entirely. He'd tinker = with it, and the structure wouldn't change, and we'd all read it, and = again the verdict was: stinkerooni. Finally, decision time. A grade was = pending on the project; he wanted to shoot his script. We decided to let = him, figuring that students need to have the freedom to fail, and that = maybe he was just the kind of kid who needed to fail before he'd learn = anything. So we gave him permission to shoot his lousy script. =20 I watched the finished product last night. It's one of the best student = films I've seen in five years. He was right, and we were wrong, all of = us. And I called the kid up this very morning, and I told him that. = Nobody knows nothin'. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:50:36 -0700 From: Gideon Burton Subject: RE: [AML] Talmage Biography? The Talmage Story: Life of James E. Talmage - Educator, Scientist, Apostle by John R. Talmage (Salt Lake City : Bookcraft, 1972). (This may be out of print-check your library) Gideon Burton > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-aml- > list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Turk325@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 4:29 PM > To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [AML] Talmage Biography? > > Can anyone recommend--or even name--a good biography of James E. Talmadge? > > Thank you. > > Kurt Weiland. > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:53:40 -0700 From: Gideon Burton Subject: [AML] Brady Udall Interview on KUER Did anyone catch the interview with Brady Udall on KUER last night (11/6/01) at 7 pm? Gideon Burton - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:58:16 -0700 From: "ROY SCHMIDT" Subject: Re: [AML] Talmage Biography? His son wrote one back in the 70's. I thought it was pretty good. The title was something like _James E. Talmadge: Scientist, Educator, Apostle_. Roy Schmidt >>> 11/06/01 04:28PM >>> Can anyone recommend--or even name--a good biography of James E. Talmadge? Thank you. Kurt Weiland. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:39:48 -0700 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Writers Conference Hmmm, it's always fun to read your own ravings the morning after, especially when you've hit SEND to a public list. Yes, I have a navel. Thanks for indulging--it was quite cathartic to write, and today I'm in a better mood because it's Onion day and I had my favorite spaghetti for lunch. I'm kind of hoping to hear some bitching from other quarters rather than anything along the lines of "Forget yourself and go to work." I showed you mine; now show me yours. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:55:20 -0800 (PST) From: Darlene Young Subject: [AML] re: Writing Rant (was: Writers Conference) Oh, Chris, thanks for your rant. It was so nice to see that someone else has a love-hate relationship with writing, that someone else thinks of writing as work (and not even fun work), that someone else wishes they could just get rid of that itch once and for all and be content with reading, filling church callings, participating in P.T.A., and all of the other stuff that all the other people in the ward are doing. I alternate between feeling superior to the non-writing masses ("you mean you don't do ANYTHING else but just live a normal life?") to feeling like an absolute idiot because I have tricked myself into thinking my life is richer with this added complication in it. And the writers' conference DOESN'T help because I come home once agonizing again about the place writing should have in my life and wondering about how much I can safely (in God's eyes and those of my family) invest in something that may someday come to absolutely nothing. It's nice if I can think that I have a God-given responsibility to "develop this talent" but not nice if it doesn't yield immediate results because then it is just fodder for the "I wish I had time to pursue MY hobbies" comments that I get from others around me. So--all I know is, I've tried to not write. I've tried to put it away "until the kids are in school," etc., and I can often do it rather contentedly--but then there it is creeping up again. I can't resist going to the conference. I can't give up the writing friends or the AML-List. I just find myself gravitating toward a writer's lifestyle, reading books that make me want to be writing, volunteering to read other's work. Silly--I've learned that it's one of the ways that the Spirit works in my life, moving me towards something almost in spite of my will and desires. I can tell what I really want by what I keep coming back to. And I keep coming back to writing. Dang it! But only recently (well, I admit it, only since the short fiction contest) have I been daring to call myself a writer (and I even worked as a technical writer for years). (I guess I mean Writer with a capital W--you know, one who writes things that count.) And that has been so FREEING to me. Go ahead. Tell two people today that you are a writer. Even better: tell them you are going to publish a writer someday. It feels sooooo good! And a little tiny voice inside says, "Yes." So that's my life. I am learning to count on that Yes. I am a writer, dang it, and I'm going to publish a book someday. So there! ===== Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 15:08:44 -0700 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Fluff Barbara Hume wrote: > At 05:52 PM 11/5/01, you wrote: > >> As a writer, I am getting terrified of you people. > > > On a list like this one, there is bound to be a certain amount of > elitism. Ignore it and follow your own vision. You can never please the > critics. Write to your true audience instead. You will do much good in > the world. Does anyone else see a dichotomy is the current discussion about fluff and quality? Insofar as the Gospel is concerned, there isn't a one of us who would think that a "fluffy" understanding of the Gospel is enough to exalt us. After all, the glory of God IS intelligence. From the pulpit, we are continually encouraged, nay, commanded, to strive for excellence in every human endeavor. An adult Saint whose complete understanding of God was at the level of, say, a primary child's, would surely run the risk of spiritual ruination, given, as Joseph Smith said, that to be truly saved, a man (or woman) must have a correct understanding of God. Should we not then, as a people and as artists, eschew with every effort of our being, things fluffy, and strive for the deeper knowledge of things temporal and eternal? Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:25:38 -0700 From: "Ethan Skarstedt" Subject: [AML] Aliens in Mormon Lit Have aliens ever been done in mainstream LDS stuff? (The "mainstream LDS" excludes Battlestar Galactica, Ivan, at least in my mind) I have been itching to explore "Mormons as Mormons in Space" in my writing and I wonder if there is any body of work that I need to be familiar with before I attempt to add to it. Some of the specific questions I'd like to get feedback on are: 1: The question of alien aliens. Are non-human, intelligent aliens going to be so incompatible with the "created in my image" concept that mainstream LDS readers will be put off when I have Mormon men, with the priesthood and everything, dealing with them? (I wonder if even Mormons who are regular SF readers will be made uncomfortable when I include the gospel as the gospel in an SF world (Earth being the only planet with human looking humans on it)) 2: What about human aliens? Humans that look like earth humans living on other planets, perhaps waiting for the Earthers to get their butts into space so they can bring the priesthood authority with them? Offend anyone? I have my own opinions on these matters but I am curious what the general consensus is. - -Ethan Skarstedt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 15:18:44 -0700 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Repenting of Stories Gae Lyn Henderson wrote: > Yes Todd, I agree that repenting of a book or a story is an interesting > notion. But it makes so much sense. I can't conceive of ever having to repent of anything I write. I CAN conceive of perhaps writing something that may get me called before a High Council (akin to the September 6 of several years ago) but would I "repent" of what I wrote? As long as I considered that my motives were pure, not based in any attempt to embarass the Church, then there would be no reason to repent, no matter how offended some person in a high position may have been over what I had written. Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:39:56 -0800 (PST) From: William Morris Subject: Re: [AML] Writing Rant I know, let's have a contest to see who has written the least in the past year while at the same time expending an incredible amount of energy thinking about writing. Actually, it's probably likely that I wouldn't win--so nevermind. But yes, I hear ya' Darlene and Chris. Thanks goodness for this list and _Irreantum_ and the small indulgence of having Marny e-mail to see if she can include part of a post in the Highlights section. We know the demands that interfere with writing. We know the tricks of trying to put together a writing schedule. We know the publishing and marketing barriers. So my question is: is there something we could be doing as a writing community to help each other better? Writing comes down to personal demons, I know. But perhaps there's a way we could egg each other on. My exam advisor has a work buddy. They talk once a week and tell each other what they accomplished and what they will accomplish before they speak again. They vent to each other. The read each other's work and tell each other about new academic journals that are possible targets. She says that this system helps. That she wouldn't have had the same level of scholarly output without it. I'm not sure how well this would translate to creative work because scholarly work is a little easier in the sense of there are very clear standards and forms for the writing. But it's one idea. Maybe ya'll have others. ~~William Morris [MOD: Please, by all means, let's talk about this. I need to gently caution, however, that AML-List serves a variety of audiences and purposes. Systematic commentary and encouragement on specific writing projects would probably need to go off-list at the point where it started to duplicate the functions and tone of a regular writing group. Of course, that could be an ideal point at which to form a spin-off list...] __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #509 ******************************