From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #582 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, January 22 2002 Volume 01 : Number 582 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 14:53:12 -0700 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Public and Private Mormon Lit On Thu, 17 Jan 2002 23:36:33 -0500, Tracie Laulusa wrote: >Was this an example of a passage you thought was proselytizing? (It's = in >the same paragraph, that's why I'm wondering.)=20 No, this would be a good example of "stream of consciousness writing very late at night." >While her books may be >proselytizing--I haven't read any yet-- Proselytizing is the wrong word, but at the time I couldn't remember a better one. It implies that the objective of the book is to preach the gospel to those not yet in possession of it. A better word might be "testimonial" or "affirmation." Nunes writes about Mormons, for Mormons--more specifically, for a particular segment of the LDS = population. Her books in every instance reaffirm the truth of the gospel and the joy = of living righteously, contrasted to the pain of living sinfully. If you = don't already believe in the gospel, they sound preachy--either, "What, my way = of life isn't good enough for you?" or "I don't get why these people are so hung up on " Again, this is all in the context of how LDS literature would succeed in the national market, not whether or not it's intrinsically valuable, or whether or not it = accurately represents Mormon culture. >this passage does not strike me as a >good example of it. This is exactly what any number of my mormon = friends >would say to me if trying to get me to go out to a movie with them. >If this passage were trying to be preachy it would have to say >something like "It's PG, and you know that we wouldn't even consider = seeing >an R or a PG-13 which is just an R-rated movie in disguise. So you can = feel >perfectly safe seeing this movie with us." I disagree, because I feel this subtext is implicit in the statement. = But I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone outside the intended audience. Nunes's books are not preachy from the standpoint of someone within the culture. >If it's a Mormon character in >the book saying it, than it seems totally with in reality for the = character >to say it whether or not any other number of adults in the world would = take >that into consideration or think it worth saying. Again, this is all about how LDS fiction appears to a non-Mormon or = national audience. To be more specific, Rachel Nunes's books exist very solidly within a set of values and beliefs that it's assumed her audience shares. =46or a Mormon audience, they know that this is the kind of thing Mormons= say to each other; most LDS members in and outside of Utah do consider movie ratings very important. For a national audience, there's not enough background in the novel to establish this as a Mormon characteristic; it just sounds strange. Now that it's daylight, I will break down that paragraph a little more clearly: 1. Public LDS fiction, with the assumption that the audience shares its worldview, appears preachy to non-Mormons. Or, if you don't like the = word "preachy," substitute "exclusive." Perception is all, in this case; it = is not the author's intent to preach, but the worldview is presented so strongly as the truth, anyone who believes otherwise will likely feel uncomfortable. To bring in another example, one of the main reactions non-Mormon readers had to Anne Perry's novel _Tathea_ (a fictionalized representation of the gospel and the Plan of Salvation) was that it was = "too preachy." I think this is often the way people react when they encounter= a strong philosophical argument they don't agree with; the other main = reaction by readers was that the novel was "so true." 2. The PG-movie reference from Rachel Nunes's book (which I think comes = from _This Time Forever_, like anyone can tell the books apart by the titles except possibly Rachel, and I wonder about that :) is an example of what makes public LDS fiction seem so exclusive. As much as this statement = makes sense to Mormons, there is no support within the novel to make it = sensible to non-Mormons. This is because the intended audience doesn't need this supporting evidence. And to bring this full circle, that's what makes it public LDS fiction. 3. Nunes's books are (strike "proselytizing") testimonials of the gospel. One of their primary functions--again, not necessarily the intent of the author--is to remind readers of the truth of the gospel. If you don't already believe it, they don't make a lot of sense. =20 As accurate a depiction of Mormon culture as Nunes's books are, I don't believe they would succeed well on the national market for those reasons. The fact that they are selling so well indicates that they do resonate = with the LDS population. And they are *very* accurate when it comes to illustrating how certain members of the Church think and behave--as well = as depicting how certain members *think* Church members ought to behave. = But in terms of Richard's question--which kind of fiction would do best in = the national market, public or private--this accuracy is presented in such a = way that only Mormons will realize how accurate it is. >That does, BTW, sum up the very strongly and often stated sentiments of = more >than one member I know about movies----along with "You can't be a good >Mormon and be a Democrat. Democrats support abortion, so if your a = Democrat >you are supporting abortion. That is a great sin." I am not kidding in= the >least. Yes, I know. I don't talk about the movies I see with people in my ward = or with my husband's next-oldest sister. There's no point to it. Nor most = of the books I read. Also no point. It is sometimes very frustrating to = have to be generous to people who, in their earnestness, are not generous with others at all. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:02:34 EST From: Derek1966@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Satire In a message dated 1/18/02 1:18:54 PM, Chris.Bigelow@UnicityNetwork.com writes: << Onion-ish Headlines: Deacons Quorum Advisor Compares Priesthood to "the Force" >> I'm sure many people have done just that. I remember being in a testimony meeting on Mother's Day in Beijing in 1985 with Elder Marvin J. Ashton and his wife Norma. I'll never forget how Sister Ashton stood and talked of the priesthood, and then went on to draw a comparison to things that Yoda did and showed Luke in "The Empire Strikes Back," especially when "he lifted his x-wing fighter from the swamp." I was so impressed. MY grandma was utterly confused by the movie, and yet Sister Ashton had obviously found some deep meaning in it (not to mention that she knew all the characters and their fighters). John Perry - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:30:27 -0700 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Fodder for Satire <<>> I'm sure the food storage software is useful for food storage obsessives, which I could be myself if I let myself go. As it is, I often bug my wife about laying in more supplies of my favorite stand-bys. I have a man in a novel who, after he converts to Mormonism, gets quite enthusiastic about food storage, more so than any other aspect of Mormonism. When his wife asks him why, he says that he HATES to be hungry. For that same reason, he also finds ways to cheat on fast Sundays. What I would most like to have related to food storage is a sorting device that makes sure the oldest food gets used first. But that would require a complicated mechanical device, something that allows you to easily pull the old food forward on the shelf and insert the new food behind it. When I worked at KFC as a teen, I learned the doctrine of FIFO--First In, First Out--and it has never left me. Does anyone remember Al Jaffee (sp?) in Mad magazine? Maybe he's still there. My favorite gags of his over the years have been the elaborate devices and solutions he cooks up for the problems and inconveniences of modern life (I remember stuff about solving parking problems and how to deal with smokers). He brought in just the right tone of progress mixed with goofiness. I just find things like food storage software so quintessentially Mormon, it makes me laugh. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:14:37 -0700 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Ayn RAND, _Atlas Shrugged_ - ---Original Message From: Andrew Hall > Her critique of socialism and altruism certainly was > devastating. What she says about charity destroying the life > force of the receiver was very convincing. But how do you > reconcile that with the Savior's commands to help the poor > and needy, go the extra mile, and all that. Christ and > Rand's positions on altruism seem to be completely at odds, > have you found a way to reconcile them? Ah. I've been pounding this one in church discussions for a long time. The problem is that the meaning of charity has changed from love to giving people money. It helps to draw things down to their essence--we're talking about helping people. You see, giving people money, as Ayn Rand points out, isn't necessarily helping them. When we decide to help the needy, too many of us are content to send a check to some organization helping people you will never see. But even when those organizations deliver their aid, are they really helping people? Truly helping people requires *knowing* them. How can you know what they need if you don't know who they are? Contrast the aid given by rock-compassionists to that given by the church in Africa. Rock-compassion sent a bunch of food that either rotted at the dock or was confiscated by local war barons. The church went in, talked with a community about what they needed, then helped them install an irrigation system and taught them modern farming techniques. I'm not even talking about the "giving a man a fish" analogy. Even that isn't truly helping someone because it's all very commanding--do things like me and you will be better off (an insupportable assumption). I'm talking about getting to know a man, to know what he needs, and then help *him* achieve those needs as much as you are able. Truly helping people requires the ability to let them learn, grow, and even suffer. On that score Ayn Rand has some interesting ideas because she keeps things very personal. Our own (LDS) culture works best when we work from individual to individual. In fact, one of the strongest systems we have in the church is the welfare system that is administrated at the bottom. The bishop, who knows his congregation, determines what aid will be provided. He has decision-making power. That's unique in a system of welfare. It distresses me somewhat that our literature tends to concentrate on the problems introduced by that degree of local control--on the abuses of the system by bishops with personal quirks that interfere in their duties and obligations. I would *love* to read a story that shows the strengths of that system to truly benefit the lives of the congregation--the strength of having broad guidelines given with implementation left to those who are best able to gauge the true effects of the implementation. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:31:36 -0700 From: Terry L Jeffress Subject: Re: [AML] American Book Publishing On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 12:39:45PM -0600, Jonathan Langford wrote: > Being a part-time/contract editor, I sent in my resume in response to this > notice (I've been wanting to expand my work base recently, and it sounded > like this might fit my circumstances). I got some information in reply > that I think will be interesting for AML-List members, particularly those > who might be thinking about submitting their own resumes. I too submitted my resume and got a reply by email. I will add my comments to those made by Jonathan: > * Payment is on the basis of 5% royalty on each book edited (after > bookseller's markup and printing costs are deducted). This appears to be > the only compensation. This single component will prevent me from working for Americn Book as an editor. Most publishing companies pay royalties on the suggested retail price of the book. Thus an author earning an 8% royalty on a $10 trade-paperback book would earn 80 cents for each copy sold. Typically the bookstore gets to buy the book for 60% of the retail price. Thus the publisher must pay 80 cents out of its $6 gross profit per copy (which works out to 13.3% of the gross). American Book proposes that the editor take a royalty not on the suggested retail price and not even on the gross. They want you to take a royalty on the net profit. So assuming that American Book sells the same $10 (SRP) for $6, and that they got a pretty good deal on printing at $1.50 per copy, they want you to take a 5% royalty on $4.50. A whopping 22.5 cents per copy -- or to put that into perspective, a 2.25% royalty on the suggested retail price. If the book does just fair and sells 1,000 copies, you make $225. If the book does really well and sells 5,000 copies, you make $1,125. Now for my really best customers, I charge $25 per hour for editing. So to compare with my own freelance work, I could only afford to put in 9 hours of editing on a just fair book and 45 hours on a really successful book. In my own experience, I need at least 40 hours to do my really best work on fiction and upwards toward 80 hours to do a good job with non-fiction. So for me, agreeing to work for American Book would mean agreeing to work for less money. Of course, you could always take the chance that the book will somehow become a bestseller and you will retire in comfort from you editing work. Frankly, I think you would make better money if you took a part-time job at $10 per hour. If you put in the 10 hours per week American Book wants, you would make $100 each week, or $5,200 per year. Probably a lot more that you would see from a year of work with American Book, and you get the checks on a regular basis. > In conventional publishing, many books (I don't know > specifics; can someone who's worked on that side suggest a percentage > range?) never make money for the publisher at all, or in any event not > enough to require paying the author more than the original advance. Conventional wisdom in the industry gives the following distribution of profit and loss for 10 books: 2 make money 4 break even 4 lose money Usually the books that make money make quite a bit of money, so that offsets the boos that don't make any money. While I was at Covenant, we did a little better (and I don't think giving away 9-year-old markiting data will change any competitor's stands). Covenant had about 4 make money, 4 break even, and 2 lose money. Only when Covenant made money, it wasn't coming in by the bushell. - -- Terry L Jeffress | There are three rules for writing the novel. South Jordan, UT | Unfortunately, no one knows what they are. | -- Somerset Maugham - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:33:48 -0700 From: "ROY SCHMIDT" Subject: Re: [AML] Roger ZELAZNY, _Damnation Alley_ (Review) While living in Baltimore (my home town), my wife-to-be lived next door to Roger Z. He was a very interesting guy, who believed the moon controlled much of what went on, and did his best work during the full moon. He was an insomniac, and worked almost exclusively by night. He was friendly, and give my wife several signed copies of his books, including _A Princess of Amber_. I never met him in Baltimore, but did get to visit during a visit he made to Provo. I'm guessing that "Balto" got his name from his creator's habitat. Roy Schmidt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:57:13 -0700 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] American Book Publishing On Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:39:45 -0600, Jonathan Langford wrote: >At the same time, it's a real question to me whether this is a good deal >for authors and editors. As an author, before agreeing to publish with >this company, I would want some information on how well their sales = efforts >have worked with titles they've already put out--information that = doesn't >seem to be readily available on the Web site. I'd particularly want to >know how their sales have been with books of a type similar to mine: = other >mysteries, for example, if I were a mystery writer. I browsed through the website for their distribution arm, Publisher = Direct, to get a sense for what kinds of books they offer and also to see if any = of the titles were available anywhere other than through them. I was able = to find a good sampling of those books available through Amazon.com, and = people have been buying and reviewing them. Like any publisher, American Book Publishing seems to have its share of excellent and mediocre titles. = But, like Jonathan, I have no idea how well they are getting the word out. I = can see that my library, for instance, doesn't seem to own any of them (my = first choice for previewing unknown books). Their web site says "available at = a bookstore near you" and, granted, I don't go to bookstores much these = days, but I certainly haven't seen any of their science fiction or fantasy = titles (which I would definitely have noticed). On the American Book Publishing site, there's a link that leads to a page about the company and their mission and promise. Their "promise" is basically that they intend to publish books promoting ethical and moral values, and that they will support those titles with "innovative = marketing and production methods that reach the broadest range of readers." = Reading their sample chapters was enlightening. I was pleased to see that "moral and ethical" didn't mean "watering down the prose so that nobody could possibly be offended by language or content." There were a few books = that I'd like to read (though I can't because I have no spare cash). About = half of the samples I looked at were not as thoroughly proofread as I would expect from professional work, but for the most part they didn't look shabby. On the subject of innovative marketing and production methods, though...I wish I knew what this meant. The first I'd ever heard of them was at the AML Writers' Conference last November. It seems to me that they have a decent product, but they really need to promote their books (and probably their publishing presence) more heavily. I can't imagine how anyone = would find out about their books if the person didn't know what she was looking for. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 19:13:05 -0600 From: "Kumiko" Subject: [AML] Re: [AML-Mag] Significant LDS Authors In your efforts to create a web page about LDS directors, you are welcome to check out our online directors profiles, which contain filmographies, biographical sketches, photographs as well as images of movie posters/videos. The following LDS directors currently have director profiles at http://www.adherents.com/movies/dir.html Jose Maria Oliveira Aldamiz Adam Anderegg Alisa Anglesey * Lino Brocka Gary Christensen Mitch Davis Rocco DeVilliers Richard Dutcher Kels Goodman Lee B. Groberg Neil LaBute Ryan Little Colin Low Aldric La'Auli Porter Richard Rich Mark Swan Blair Treu - --Preston Hunter www.adherents.com - ---------- - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:55:50 -0700 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] Garbled Sayings I have a novel character who always mixes up or conflates common sayings. I guess these are sort of glorified malapropisms, which are usually more substituting one word for another, aren't they? ("Polo bears" instead of polar bears, "Remember Pearl Island" instead of harbor, etc.) For example, my wife always cracks me up when she says, "Stick that in your craw and smoke it." Another one I heard today was, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the oven." Do any others come to mind? If you hear any in the future and happen to remember my request, I'm collecting them. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 18:11:03 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] re: Ayn RAND, _Atlas Shrugged_ Conservative Catholic writer William F. Buckley, Jr. considers Ayn Rand's ideas on the "virtue of selfishness" to be a crude form of social Darwinism and the antithesis of the teachings of Jesus. When she met Buckley, the first thing she said to him was "You are too intelligent to believe in God!" The recent movie "The Passion of Ayn Rand" (with Helen Mirren as Rand and Eric Stoltz as her acolyte and lover Nathaniel Branden) depicts the "Objectivists" as a cult; and exposes Rand's ideology of ultra-rationalism as essentially heartless, and unworkable in a world where emotion exists alongside intellect. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 13:06:23 -0500 From: "Quinn Warnick" Subject: [AML] New Yorker Article (was: Life in Mormon Culture) Marilyn Brown wrote: | HOORAY and RAH! Last night I sat down and read the ENTIRE article about | MORMONS in the New Yorker! [snip] | The writing was good, and I especially loved the ENDING! He quoted Tolstoy's | interview with Andrew White, (everybody loves Tolstoy) who said, "The Mormon | people teach the American religion; their principles teach the people not | only of Heaven, and its attendant glories, but how to live so that their | social and economic relations with each other are placed on a sound basis. | If the people follow the teachings of this Chruch, nothing can stop their | progress--it will be limitless." I was SO PROUD to be a Mormon! Actually, Lawrence Wright (the author) makes it clear that the final quote attributed to Tolstoy wasn't really Tolstoy at all. He writes, "Andrew D. White, an American diplomat in Russia, had a conversation with Tolstoy about Mormonism, in which the great novelist reportedly said that 'on the whole he preferred a religion which professed to have dug its sacred books out of the earth to one which pretended that they were let down from Heaven.' Forty-five years later, a Mormon writer [Wright doesn't say which Mormon writer - any guesses?] told the story with embellishments that were no doubt more appealing to his audience. In this account, Tolstoy told White, 'The Mormon people ...[insert the quote that Marilyn cited]'." I have read the faulty Tolstoy quote before, and I believe it has been used by well-meaning latter-day saints for years as evidence that great thinkers (like Tolstoy) somehow endorsed the Church. I'm inclined to trust The New Yorker on this one -- you won't find a more meticulously edited and source-checked magazine in America today. As far as the overall tone of the article, I'm not sure I wholly agree with Marilyn's favorable take. Yes, it does a much better job with the facts than recent articles in Time and Newsweek, but it also spent much more time on polygamy and the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The general tone of most New Yorkers profiles like this one is superiority -- "Now we're going to give you yet another glimpse into the world of poor, misguided Middle-America" -- and while that tone normally makes for great articles, it's a bit harder to enjoy when you are one of the poor, misguided Middle-Americans in question. I've read The New Yorker cover to cover every week for a several years, and I've been waiting for the moment when I would know enough about a subject to write a thoughtful letter to the editor (thus fulfilling my dream of seeing my name in print in TNY). But even after finishing this article, the only thing I could soundly refute was Wright's claim that caffeinated soft drinks "disappeared from [BYU's] campus" after President Hinckley's appearance on Larry King Live. (For the record, they were gone long before that event.) I finished the article wishing Wright had interviewed some different people; at the same time, I realized that, given what New Yorker writers have done to subjects they really want to hurt, things could have been a lot worse. An LDS friend and I talked about the article over lunch last week, and I think he summed it up well: "No press is bad press. If nothing else, this will give the missionaries in New York something to talk about when they're tracting." Quinn Warnick - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 18:25:49 -0500 From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] Roger ZELAZNY, _Damnation Alley_ (Review) Shameless Plug: If any of you have access to the Magill's Masterplots Sci Fi and Fantasy, the updated version that has an analysis of Zelazny's "Lord of Light," check out my work. One of the few scholarly articles I'm proud of. [Tony Markham] "D. Michael Martindale" wrote: > > I've only read a limited number of Zelazny books. Among them, _Lord of > Light_ was best. It's an exciting adventure romp mixed in with some very > clever religious treatment, in this case, Hinduism. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 17:01:43 -0800 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] American Book Publishing Two things I would say in response to Jonathan's statements about Amercian Book Publishing's editorial structure are these: 1. I have edited some books that I know were extremely successful only because of my editing. I really felt I could have gotten more from royalties on those books than I did in editorial fees. For that reason, I kind of like ABP's structure. 2. Most royalties in the LDS market are paid on the retail price of the book. Many publishers in the LDS market, however, follow the national market, which almost always pays royalties on the wholesale price (the suggested retail price less the bookseller's mark up--or as we usually term it in the industry, the publisher's discount). No publisher I have ever heard of deducts the printing costs from the wholesale price before paying a royalty! That, however, is ABP's royalty structure. I am concerned about that, especially given the size of the royalty (5%). As an editor, I don't quite know what I could expect from that formula, but my guess is that if they follow the same formula for their authors, they will only get authors whose work requires a LOT of editing. Richard Hopkins - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 20:03:56 -0700 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: [AML] Carol Lynch WILLIAMS, _My Angelica_ (Review) _My Angelica_, by Carol Lynch Williams Published by Delacorte Press, 1999 Hardcover, 149 p., $15.95 US ($4.99 pb) ISBN 0-385-32622-X Reviewed by Melissa Proffitt At the 2001 AML Writers' Conference, Carol Lynch Williams read from her novel _My Angelica_ and had the whole room in tearful laughter. The = brief excerpt convinced me that I had to read the whole book for myself. Here, see what you think. The last line's the one that really kills me: Angelica performed CPR on her Indian lover. His lips were blue. Both of his eyes were closed. At least, Angelica thought they were. One eye was covered by a bearskin eye patch. The other lay limply in its socket.... Angelica's perfectly curled hair trembled with fear. Her white-gloved hands looked even whiter on her lover's bare chest. "Get up, 247 Bears. Get up!" Angelica yodeled like an American Indian banshee. Suddenly the piece of deer meat spewed forth from his mouth. The dark-haired man breathed deeply, then stood on his own two feet. Angelica, he signed to her. You have saved me. Will you be my squaw? (p.47) Hmmm. Perhaps this needs a little explaining. _My Angelica_ is the = story of a teenage girl named Sage Oliver, whose dearest dream is to be a = writer of romance novels. She's genuinely convinced she's the hottest thing = since John Grisham turned in his legal briefcase for a word processor and = hasn't a clue that her stories (of which the above is an excerpt) are abysmal. = Her best friend, George, keeps trying to tell her the truth, but she thinks = he's just kidding her. When the school's annual writing contest comes up, = Sage decides to enter--and George does his best to stop her, to save her from humiliation. Adding to the complexity are a number of subplots involving Sage's dislike of George's best male friend Andrew, Sage's boy-crazy = friend Cheri (who is Sage's biggest fan), and the popular but slimy Bob Taylor, who's also interested in Sage. As the novel progresses, Sage and = George's secret romantic feelings for each other gradually develop and become more public. The outcome of the writing contest coincides neatly with the resolution of the hidden romance, and the ending is quite satisfying. =20 _My Angelica_ is told in four different "voices," each set off clearly = with its own typeface: Sage's first-person narrative, George's first-person narrative, the various Angelica manuscripts ("I have 638 beginnings about Angelica," Sage says), and unattributed poems that are clearly George's work. I admire Williams' writing ability throughout this novel; it is = easy enough to imitate atrocious writing, but it's a much more subtle trick to fake mildly awful writing, and Williams does both. The obvious contrast = is between Sage's Angelica stories and George's far superior poetry, but the difference between their internal narratives also indicates which of them= is the better writer. Sage is a sweet person, but she's got some very large blind spots about herself and her writing. George got points from me for being brave enough to tell Sage about her crappy writing; even though she doesn't believe him, it takes a lot of nerve to say that to someone. Especially if it's a friend. ESPECIALLY if you want to remain friends afterward. I also liked that the novel avoided the popularity trap so = many teen novels fall into; neither Sage nor George is the most popular kid in school, but they don't spend all their time agonizing about it. Both are average kids whose problems are deeply felt without being overly = dramatic. Though I enjoyed the book overall, the subplot involving Bob Taylor (a popular jock who is George's romantic rival for Sage) seemed out of = place. As a romantic complication, Bob is unnecessary, because the romance is sufficiently complicated by Sage and George's obliviousness to each = other's romantic feelings. Though it illustrated a good secondary theme--the difference between fighting with words and fighting with fists--Bob's = role still wasn't developed enough to seem important until almost the end of = the book. At the moment of physical conflict between George and Bob, I was annoyed at the distraction from what I saw as the more important plot twist--the announcement of the writing contest winner. My only other gripe is something that is, I realize, probably out of Williams' control, and that is that the girl on the cover appears to be about ten years old. Williams' description of Sage in the novel is of a petite girl who does look young for her age (she's 16, I think) but the illustration is of a baby-faced kid. This made it hard for me to think = of Sage as old enough to be seriously thinking about boys and dating. I mention this as a caveat to all the adult readers out there who might be = put off by the cover (which also includes a modest version of the typical = clinch one sees on bodice-ripper romances). And I definitely think you adult readers should read this book. = Simplicity of plot is too often confused with immaturity of style; _My Angelica_ is = a straightforward, well-written story about two young writers figuring out what it means to be writers. This novel is a reminder that being a = writer isn't as simple as calling yourself one, or even putting a story down on paper. It takes courage, clear-sightedness, and the willingness to = accept criticism. Readers who are also writers will find Sage's writing both = funny and painful, as I'm certain just about every writer started out with = stories as awful as Angelica's. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 20:11:14 -0700 From: "Nan McCulloch" Subject: [AML] Prayer Before Reading When I read Linda Adams account of praying before she chooses reading = material, I remember the one time that I prayed before reading a book. = Years ago when _No Man Knows My History_ by Fawn Brody came out I = remember my father being shocked and appalled. I am not even sure he = read the book, but he was adamantly against the contents thereof. Since = my respect and admiration for my father was great, I NEVER considered = reading the book. However, about 7 years ago I needed to read the book = and I couldn't resist any longer. I prayed fervently that I could read = the book with (a.) an open mind and (b.) that on completion my testimony = would be intact. I am glad that I waited to read the book and yes, my = prayer was answered. My testimony remains undiminished. I can't say = I recommend the book to everyone without reservation, but the time was = right for me. My husband (a bishop for 10 years) also read the book and = we discussed it carefully. That was helpful to me for many reasons. = Has anyone had this or a similar experience? =20 Nan McCulloch Draper, UT - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 20:18:06 -0700 From: "Alan Rex Mitchell" Subject: Re: [AML] Annual Movie Tabulation from: "Linda Adams" > > I didn't get any good report, lovely, or praiseworthy out of it at all. > > I got: Basic teen movie about How and When will I Finally Lose my Annoying > Virginity. > > That was the theme of this movie. I didn't get any "moral" out of it at > all. All through the film, the girl is waiting (making several abortive > attempts, some of which admittedly _are_ funny) to find the "right" guy to > do it with, which she does at the end; although the lucky fellow is > not the one she supposed it would be. Thankfully she is less of a spoiled > brat by the end. And there are some funny scenes (driving on the freeway, > for one), but overall this was not, not, NOT about morality as any > Latter-day Saint defines it. It's a teen flick about How To Get Laid. I'm wishing that the Linda, (if I'm not mistaken, the author Irreantum-published poem "Screwed His Brains Out" or something to that effect) would compare and contrast the movie Clueless and her poem. I'm not being faciteous. Alan Mitchell - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 18:43:56 -0800 From: "Jerry Tyner" Subject: RE: [AML] Life in Mormon Culture Lisa - You have my vote for being both courageous and inspired. It is not your fault that there are many in the Church who can't understand or are too tightly wound to accept when a message comes to someone by inspiration. If others can't accept that inspiration it is not your concern. I especially liked how you were going to teach the second lesson (if they had let you); very enlightening. The fact you did not feel guilty for saying no the second time should be enough. You did good! :-) Jerry Tyner Orange County, Ca - -----Original Message----- [snip] This brought to mind an experience I had recently that I thought the AML folks might find amusing. You see, I was asked by my RS presidency to lead a Home Enrichment meeting about "something in LDS literature." [snip] Lisa Downing - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 20:36:49 -0700 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Significant LDS Authors The problem with a list like this in defining what you mean by "significant" and where you draw the line between fiction, essay, and other kinds of writing. And of course once you publish it you open yourself to criticism for who you did or didn't include. For example, as both Jonathan and Kathleen Woodbury have pointed out, I can't be considered a significant author in terms of either total published work or general recognition within the broad community of Mormon authors. Yes, I have 21 short story sales, but most of those were to small or regional markets. If I have any impact on Mormon authors it's as a private critiquer of stories, a general role as cheerleader, and as one of many part time pop critics here on the AML-List (where I've probably posted more words than any other single person in the list's history--I'm certainly in the top ten, and my extended rambles have certainly put a lot of words into the ether). Not that the things we say on this list aren't significant, but the total audience impacted by our forum is actually quite small, if heavily weighted toward authors, editors, and critics. If List impact is a criteria, then I think you need to add Harlow Clark and Todd Peterson and James Picht and Terry Jeffress and the Proffitts and others who have contributed excellent work in this otherwise essentially unrecognized forum. Both Kathleen and Jonathan make an good point in terms of the over-representation of only marginally successful sf writers on your list. I understand that it's your preferred genre so you have more awareness of certain local players in that niche market, and since it's your list you can do anything you want. But (to pick a few examples) Kathleen has more publications in national venues than I do. Virginia Baker has only a small handful of publications, but all of her sales have been to top markets and have received critical notice for their stylistic excellence in the national press. Russell W. Asplund has published far more and better stories in top markets. So... Expand or contract the list as meets your concept, but there are a lot of people who deserve placement on such a list more than I do. I hope to earn a legitimate spot on that list in the coming years, but for right now I think your best effort would in focusing authors who have reached wide audiences with their work. Of course asking for input from the list was a good start. I wish you luck in your venture. I know how difficult it is for Marny to try to maintain just a Mormon sf bibliography; trying to catalog "significant" Mormon authors with the kind of information you're asking for is a significant task. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #582 ******************************