From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #644 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 Wednesday, March 13 2002 Volume 01 : Number 644 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:57:15 -0700 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Sugar Beet in SL City Weekly The fact the Sugar Beet was mentioned positively in the SL Weekly goes a long way to legitimize faithful LDS literature. Things related to Mormonism in that paper are usually of a negative nature. Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:13:35 -0700 From: "gae lyn henderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Sugar Beet Update I really do love this stuff guys. So keep it up. The Olympics aftermath--that's great, and "Franklin-Covery Materials found in Al-Qaeda Training Camps"....too funny. And "Their Music Sucks but it is Appropriate"...yes! I think because we know our culture so well we don't even need to read the articles! Reading the titles pretty much allows the articles to write themselves in the mind. But I'll read them anyway, don't worry. Gae Lyn Henderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 03:29:54 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Desensitized Nudity Clark Goble wrote: [My apologies if I have cut your arguments too much to the bone in my attempt to avoid quoting large amounts of your message.] > When a woman undresses, how > can she reduce the meaning of her act so that it doesn't take that sexual > meaning that is inherent in the community meaning of the act. > We must see how the intents are put within that > community set of meanings. > Now I assert that she can't eliminate those sexual meanings. > to eliminate the sexual meaning of her > act, I have to take a sexual meaning. If, for example, she says, "this is > not sexual," then for me to understand that I have to already have an idea > of the act as a sexual act. She wants me to eliminate from my mind the > sexuality, but that requires me to become aware of the sexuality first. You'll have to forgive an old pragmatist who, while enjoying intellectual flights like this, doesn't put much store in considering them terribly relevant to reality. If I say, "Buttering my bread is not a sexual act," that doesn't mean there needs to be sexuality in the act in the first place before someone can understand me. The woman isn't wanting a single thing when she gets undressed, except to get undressed. She isn't thinking how she really wants to remove the sexuality from the act. It's obviously nonsexual, to the point where the thought doesn't occur to wonder one way or the other. The voyeur is imposing the sexual meaning on the situation. He knows she doesn't mean it sexually, but he chooses to make it such. The source of the sexual context is associations he made in the past which are inappropriately applied to the current context, not her undressing. If our society assumes an inherent sexuality in the act of undressing, then that's precisely the thing I'm decrying--the artificial cultural sexualizing of an inherently nonsexual act. Neither undressing nor nudity need be construed as sexual if we're not socialized throughout our lives to believe it. That contextual meaning is artifically imposed by culture, not inherent in the situation. Actual acts of flirting, foreplay and sex are what make things inherently sexual, not a state of dress. > Lets look at the undressing in that sense. Does the woman undressing > provide any clues that her undressing is not to be taken sexual? Sexual until proven otherwise? I would say the burden of proof is--or at least ought to be--in the oppposite direction. The woman undressing doesn't need to provide any clues that her undressing is nonsexual--on the contrary, one should be able to safely assume that a person undressing is being nonsexual, unless clues are provided otherwise. It's a sad reflection on our society if the opposite is true. > What does > the context suggest about the undressing? If it doesn't limit the context > enough, then a sexual reading of her undressing is just as defensible a > reading as is a non-sexual one. I have no idea why someone would think that. If you come across a woman undressing in her home at bedtime, how can a sexual context be as viable as a nonsexual one? If her husband is leering at her while she does it, why then you have a definite sexual clue going on. But absent such a clue, why would you ever assume she wasn't just getting ready for bed? > Given the provided context couldn't she > intend her undressing to be sexual? In the world of intellectual theorizing, yes, she could. In the real world, the chances are negligible. > If she didn't intend it but didn't > modify the context, then isn't the error in her production? No, because there's no reason (outside the mind of perverts) to assume a woman getting undressed alone at bedtime is being sexual, so she has no obligation to modify any context. Anyone who assumes sexuality is imposing an unreasonable context on the situation. > (Her act as a > recognized message with meaning) Yes, her act of getting undressed at bedtime is a recognized message with meaning: it means she's getting ready for bed, and has no sexual content. > Further, if she does things like close > curtains, close the door and so forth, don't those actions (context) show > that her act is in fact sexual? This intrigues me. I would have expected the opposite argument. So closing one's curtains is sexual, and leaving them open is not. Okay, I'll play along. Since in my scenario the voyeur could see her undressing, she obviously has the curtains open and therefore is communicating that this is not a sexual act. Try that one on your wife, she what she says. - -- 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 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 19:21:44 +0900 From: Kari Heber Subject: Re: [AML] _Angels in America_ on HBO? Clark wrote: >___ Kari ___ >| While I think that Harper is clearly an exaggeration, there >| is a basis for her valium centered life (at least that's how >| I remember her character from when I saw the play in '95). >| Eli Lilly sold more Prozac per capita in Utah than any other >| state (1997 figures). And overall antidepressant use per >| capita in UT was reported, during the olympics, as being the >| highest of the states. > ___ > >I'm not quite sure what you intend by this Kari. On the one hand you seem >to suggest that the "basis" or ground of the "valium centered life" is >valium. Is that the homogeny? That all addicts are addicted? > [snip] Clark raises some good points, and my original response was more off-the-cuff than well-reasoned. I am now going to have to buy the plays to read, having been 7y since I saw the play. (Now maybe my wife will let me buy them :) ) Without having recently read _Angels_ or _Perestroika_, what I am going to say really is based from my memory of my impressions (how completely inaccurate this is likely to be), and I am not really sure that I can comment on Kushner's intentions per se. I am well aware that antidepressants and benzodiazepines (of which valium belongs) are different classes of meds, but you would be suprised how many patients I see who are depressed, and on an antidepressant, and additionally on a benzo for "anxiety." My impression of Harper was that of a young lady with neurosis (a very vague term as used today) and anxiety, and probably a personality disorder, who had turned to prescription medication to help her cope with the world around her. I used the antidepressant figures to suggest that for some reason Mormons tend to use psychotropic prescription medications more frequently than others. Trying to correlate these is probably a stretch, and a misuse of the figures I used. I came away from Angels thinking that Kushner was saying, "Hey look here. Here is a group of people who foreswear recreational drug use, but are quick to turn to prescription medications as a panacea (sp?) for their ills. Where's their God?" Which I happened to think was an interesting question. (I am certain that my perception was colored by the fact that I was exactly half way through medical school when I saw the play.) Clark's question of "why" is not addressed by Kushner. As far as how he views Mormonism, I think that Kushner uses Harper and Joe as expressly opposite of his view of our conservativism (politics/religion) and homogeny (culture). In doing so he is asking "It's the 1990's, what kind of group would exclude these very human people." In asking this, he is critizing our view of "loving the sinner but hating the sin" that really often results in us excluding those who are different. As a Mormon, this is how I interpreted the performances I saw. It is going to be interesting to see how my views change as I read them. - -Kari Heber - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 19:37:38 +0900 From: Kari Heber Subject: Re: [AML] Sugar Beet in SL City Weekly Bill Willson wrote: >I agree, there are many thing that happen in and around our church and >culture that are laughable. I think Robert Kirby has a knack for staying on >the right side of the line. He makes us see the humor within our culture >and meetings without a mean spirit. > >I too wonder what purpose the Sugar Beet will serve to help strengthen the >church and bring understanding to the readers. Kirby's column is clearly >identified as satire. He makes no attempt to draw the unsuspecting >uninformed reader in to the deception. My impression of reading sltrib.com, is that there are more than a few people who think that Kirby is mean-spirited. I personally generally find him very funny. When reading him on-line there is nothing to identify his column as satire. The print version may do so, but online it is clearly not the case. So I think the comparison between him and _The Sugar Beet_ is not completely accurate. This prompts me to ask the following question: why does humor have to "strengthen the church and bring understanding to the readers?" I personally think there is a role/purpose for humor that makes fun of ourselves and some of our general stupidness. I think the whole BK Packer article was perfect in this regards. It really showed how stupid our veneration of the Apostles can be. - -Kari Heber - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 08:56:18 -0700 From: Gideon Burton Subject: RE: [AML] Validation from GA's As I recall Carol Lynn Pearson's poetry was quoted and she was given attribution in a General Conference talk years ago. But the point is still well made. A recent anthology, something like "Best Loved Poems of the Latter-day Saints" was put together from someone who had collated the poetry quoted in General Conference going back I don't know how long. The result was a very tepid collection that did not (from my cursory perusal) have any LDS poets within it. Gideon - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 14:42:19 -0600 From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Popularity of M*A*S*H (Comp 1) [MOD: This is a compilation post.] >From susanpc@platformcreative.com Mon Mar 11 13:54:24 2002 I haven't watched M*A*S*H in years, but I still think it's the best tv show ever made. Maybe that's why it's so popular in Utah. :) Susan [Malmrose] - ---------------------------------------- >From dc.huls@verizon.net Mon Mar 11 14:33:51 2002 I have never lived in Utah. I do however watch reruns of M*A*S*H Your question put me to the task of deciding why I enjoy it. I served during the Vietnam era, had a cushy job in Germany in Data Processing when we still used 80 column punch cards! We didn't write programs, we wired boards to use in EAM equipment to print 15,000+ pay checks for the division personel. I worked with people like the characters in M*A*S*H. One an heir to the Buster Brown Shoe fortune, couldn't remember to take a shower or change his socks, so we did it for him on occasion. Great pinochle and bridge player though. I knew each of those M*A*S*H characters somewhere in my tour of duty. The scrounger, the womanizer, the Chaplain, and Colonel Potter fit several of my CO's. The brilliant surgeons who improvised in the field to save lives and cared about the men. I worked with those guys. Most of us hated the Army and the war the ridiculous formations for clerks and accountants having to go out and fire weapons we never used. Not happy to be there. Making the best of what we had and praying that those we were sending to VN would make it back home to their families with their lives and all their body parts. What kept us united was each other, not the silly routines that made the 'lifers" happy. I guess M*A*S*H allows me to remember with a smile, a tear, and gratitude a time of my life that might otherwise be considered a time of 34 months down the tube. I do not recall when M*A*S*H first hit TV but I believe it went a long way towards helping VN veterans feel a little better about a war that was a politicians war drummed up to keep the bankers and the manufacturers happy. Still, in my opinion, the real reason that JFK was shot at the very moment that I was walking my guard post at an ammo dump in Germany. Some day I need to write about those 34 months of service. I was treated well, made rank, had officers who treated me royally as an enlisted man and one Major who told me get the H... out of the army when my company commander was waving silver bars in front of me if I would re-enlist! The Major made a prophecy to me that came true and I was glad I took his advise. I only wish some of my buddies had had the same opportunity. Their names are inscribed on walls around this great nation now. Craig Huls US Army 1962-65 504th Admin Co 4th Armored Division Goeppingen Germany - ------------------------------------------- >From annette@lyfe.com Mon Mar 11 17:09:25 2002 I love this show! Why? Simple. It is one of the best written sitcoms in the history of television. I am the first to admit that the earlier episodes aren't nearly as good as the later ones, for a variety of reasons--not only were they not as well written, they also had some flatter characters (Frank Burns, among others) and more cliche story lines. But by the time Potter and Winchester came on the scene, the writers and characters really got developed. Even Margaret, who in the Frank days was pretty one-dimensional, got deeper and grew as the show went on. Other characters looked flat and shallow, but upon closer inspection turned out to be complex. Winchester is the best example of this. On the surface he looks snooty and intolerant, but several episodes show his softer and more caring side (I'm thinking specifically about a Christmas episode and one with a stuttering soldier who is mocked by his fellow soldiers, but there are seveal others). The show's best time was post-Potter and before Radar left, but it was pretty great after Radar, too. The breadth of topics the show covered are pretty amazing: hope, despair, life, death, love, hate, intolerance, acceptance, fear, peace, humor, despair, honesty/dishonesty (and the fine line between the two at times), right, wrong, justice, personal demons, human weakness, triumph of the human spirit -- and I'm just warming up here. I could go on. Annette Lyon - ----------------------------------------- >From rrasband@yahoo.com Tue Mar 12 13:25:21 2002 "MASH: that funny show with the funny doctors who bully people who don't agree with them."--Walker Percy, "The Thanatos Syndrome" The question Jennifer asks is one I've wondered about myself. MASH was a CBS show when that network was number one in the ratings during the '70's and KSL-TV in Utah (Channel 5) was then a CBS affiliate. It was a ritual for them to show MASH every weekday night after the 10 o'clock news: if you didn't like Johnny Carson, MASH was what you watched. There were good things about MASH. The brilliant Larry Gelbart was a producer and writer during the early seasons, and the show was often side-splittingly funny. Along with "All in the Family" it was one of the first TV shows to give some psychological depth and nuance to the characters, as well as a new candor about subject matter that was refreshing. Some no-so-good things about the show were its very '70's attitudes about sex and alcohol, and its cheap left-wing politics. (Alan Alda seemed to believe the Korean war was pointless, and the United States was equally to blame along with the other parties in the conflict. One wonders if today he were forced to choose which country he would live in, would he really choose North Korea over South Korea. Of course, the show was really about Vietnam, which opens up a whole new can of worms altogether.) My theory about the popularity of the show among Utahns is this: it catered to one of our less attractive qualities--our self-righteousness. No one was more preeningly morally superior than the doctors of MASH. (They certainly considered themselves better than the poor slobs who actually joined the Army, rather than be drafted.) As Walker Percy said in his novel about doctors run amok, "The Thanatos Syndrome", Hawkeye and B.J. were adept persecutors of who those they considered lesser beings. I'm afraid that is a common human failing and one Mormons are not immune to on occasion.; and the show may have tapped into that. It takes some time for the zeitgeist to change and attitudes to clarify. I was a fan of the show in the early '80's. By the early '90's, I actively disliked the reruns. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 18:12:59 -0800 From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: [AML] Good Mormon Lit (was: Educating an Audience) Reading Ethan's thoughts on LDS fiction, I had to respond, after lurking here on AML for a few weeks. Once I, like Ethan, felt that most LDS fiction I read "stinks", so I went on a quest (started about five years ago) to see if I could find any exceptions to that. Here's a list of books I discovered that changed my mind about "all LDS fiction". I realized my opinion was ill-advised and not based on what was available, but on what I found marketed slickly at Deseret Book and Seagull. I found the library and book tables at places like AML conferences and writers' workshops better haunts for discovering good LDS fiction. (Again, that marketing thing...) I'm sure I've not read everything, so if someone wants to add to my list of 'must reads', please do...I'm still on my quest: THE GIANT JOSHUA by Maureen Whipple THE BACKSLIDER by Levi Peterson FALLING TOWARDS HEAVEN by John Bennion (discovered 3 weeks ago at AML) DARK ANGEL by Robert Kirby (no it's not humor) A LITTLE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS by Virginia Sorenson THE EVENING AND THE MORNING by Virginia Sorenson ASPEN MAROONEY by Levi Peterson BREEDING LEAH (short stories) by John Bennion SAINTS by Orson Scott Card I've always liked Orson Scott Card, and buy everything he writes in hardcover (which is my way of paying for an author's talent, hoping he'll keep writing), but I realize most of what he writes is not "LDS" fiction, although he is an LDS author. So, just my humble opinion, but Ethan, before you say it all stinks, broaden your range of authors. (Non-fiction essayists I enjoy include Eugene England [TENDING THE GARDEN with Lavina Fielding Anderson], Emma Lou Thayne, Louise Ulrich...perhaps they have written fiction as well that I haven't discovered yet.) The bigger question in my mind, is why are so many who write good LDS fiction either expatriates or dissatisfied, or hmmm....what would the PC way to put it be..."less faithful"...? Can one be a peaceful, contented, believing LDS person and write good fiction? Maybe this is a faulty observation on my part, but it just seems that minds who can create something free of trite didacticism are also minds who eventually give up on the LDS faith and choose another path. Either that or they are shut out of the community, as Maureen Whipple and others of the "lost generation" of LDS authors experienced in their lifetimes. Perhaps that lack of acceptance by their community of origion chases them away? Kim Madsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 06:20:14 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] BYU Medieval Plays (SL Tribune) [MOD: This reminds me of the versions of four medieval passion plays that were performed at BYU back in the late 1980s, when I was a student. Summer of 1989, perhaps? On the quad in front of the administration building. Surprisingly effective. The language was slightly modernized by one of the BYU English professors, whose name slips my mind at the moment (he taught my popular medieval literature class), but other than that, they were pretty much as in the original.] BYU Gets Medieval, Takes Morality Plays to the Streets Sunday, March 10, 2002 BY CELIA R. BAKER THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE Theater students at Brigham Young University are investigating ideas about morality that are positively Medieval, and the school's famously strict honor code has nothing to do with it. Two one-act medieval morality plays, "Magnificence," written by John Skelton and adapted by Eric Samuelsen, and "Everyman," with an anonymous author, will be performed in the Margetts Theatre on the Provo campus beginning Friday at 7:30 p.m. Director Loraine Edwards says the audiences should arrive early in order to be drawn into communal festivities that typically preceded Medieval theater. "When the audience comes in, there will be street theater going on," says Edwards, indicating that puppetry, improvised scenes and interaction with actors are part of the experience. She advises those who come to dress casually for sitting on cushions and blankets spread on the floor. (Chairs also will be provided.) "We're giving a casual feeling of what it would have been like to go into the streets and watch theater," Edwards says. Edwards describes morality plays as "religious teaching tools for the laymen, who didn't understand the Latin spoken at church." The plays were intended to be understood on two levels, and featured characters who personified abstract concepts. They usually dramatized a psychological or spiritual conflict. In "Everyman," the most famous morality play, the title character is busy enjoying the pleasures of the flesh when he is summoned unexpectedly by Death. He finds himself deserted by Kindred, Fellowship and Goods, and later Beauty and Strength disappear. Only Good Deeds will help him get to Paradise. The message is still pertinent, says Edwards, who modernized some of the language of the play and set it in contemporary costumes. "Magnificence" is less well known. BYU theater professor Eric Samuelsen, who adapted the play from Middle English, says its last production was probably in 1511. Samuelsen describes Magnificence as "a kingly character who is advised to follow a path of moderation. Various evil characters step in and urge him to use wealth and power to gratify his desires. Some of their language is gutter language that is quite funny -- a rollicking kind of verse. I try to capture that." Edwards points out that John Skelton was a tutor to Henry VIII, and that "Magnificence" includes veiled statements about England's monarch, making it one of the first social plays in the English language. Once religious plays were taken out of the church and given social context, says Edwards, the evolution to the plays of Shakespeare is easy to trace. Teaching Tools Two English morality plays, "Everyman" and "Magnificence," will be presented in the Margetts Theatre in the Harris Fine Arts Center, Brigham Young University, Provo, beginning Friday and running Tuesdays through Saturdays, all at 7:30 p.m., through March 30. A pre-show will begin at 7 p.m. each evening. Half-price preview performances are Wednesday and Thursday. There is a matinee March 23 at 2 p.m. Tickets are $12; $9 for students and faculty. Call (801) 378- 4322 or visit www.byu.edu/hfac. Seating is on the floor; cushions and folding chairs will be available. Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 08:53:47 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes Harlow's contribution is like a literature course. And I loved reading it, Harlow. I'm not sure everyone else will take the time, but it is THE most astute and comprehensive coverage I've seen for a while, and I had a laughing fit when you wrote Orson Scotchguard! Too bad he'll never see it! It's even symbolic. HOORAY! Thank you! Marilyn Brown - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 02:00:30 -0500 From: "Debra Brown" Subject: [AML] Fw: MN Author Virginia Sorenson topic of March 14 lecture: BYU Press Release 9Mar02 US UT Prov A2 Author Virginia Sorenson topic of March 14 lecture PROVO, UTAH -- Susan Howe, associate professor of English at Brigham Young University, will deliver a lecture as part of the International Lecture Series on Thursday (March 14) at noon in 238 Herald R. Clark Building. Howe will present a biography of Virginia Sorenson, an accomplished fiction writer. Sorenson wrote several novels and children's books. "Virginia Sorenson was a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," Howe said. "Her works attracted the first national attention to Mormon literature." The lecture is free and open to all who would like to attend. Howe teaches creative writing, contemporary American poetry and women's literature at BYU where she joined the faculty in 1988. She is a creative writer specializing in poetry and play writing. Her poems have appeared in "Shenandoah," "Southwest Review," "Prairie Schooner," "The New Yorker" and several other journals. -###- Source: Author Virginia Sorenson topic of March 14 lecture BYU Press Release 8Mar02 A2 http://www.byu.edu/news/releases/Mar/virginia.htm >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 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 10:26:47 -0700 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] HALE, "The Singles Ward" (SL Tribune) > "Even if it did really suck, you should be rooting for the > home team and encouraging Utah filmmakers." > -- Eric Martinis This is the most insidious comment in this entire article. We are a Church that teaches excellence in all our endeavors. To support a flawed piece of art (I haven't seen Singles Ward so have no opinion on it as yet) *merely* because it's a Utah film about our culture is to place intent over accomplishment. You can't get into heaven just becuase you're sincere. You actually have to accomplish something. Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:14:26 -0800 From: jltyner@postoffice.pacbell.net Subject: Re: [AML] J.C. Duffy on Brigham City I think Eric Snider addressed many of my own thoughts on J.C. Duffy's presentation about Brigham City, nevertheless I wanted to put out some of my own thoughts on this. Let me get to the hard stuff right away. Duffy seems to feel that Dutcher is not making room for a murderer to find forgiveness or showing a Christlike attitude toward such an individual, especially having Terry say, "They don't forgive you, not ever. For the rest of your life, no matter how good you are." Let's get something clear, the real part of this character raped a twelve year-old girl. People don't simply snap and do that. They escalate to that point bit by bit. What would have been interesting is if that was a point that was explored in the movie, that people, especially communities like the LDS tend to ignore or are ignorant of warning signs such deviants work up to especially in adolescence, that's when they can be turned. When a perpetrator reaches the point of a violation so gross and force- ful as a rape, it is EXTREMELY difficult to rehabilitate them. And yet I see out in society at large and amongst many religious peoples such as Mormons quick to try and forgive and forget toward these types of perpetrators. I tend to think that is more a self congratulatory move of "See what a wonderful Christian I am, I am so forgiving toward the worst of these my brethren." I see that a pantywaist form of belief and a misuse of the nature of forgiveness and mercy. The true mercy that needs to be extended is to make sure you keep individuals like this locked up permanently away from any potential victims, no matter how much they've turned around, I'd rather not take the chance and feel like I'd helped create new victims in my rush to show how compassionate I was toward a Terry-like person. Let me give you a real life literary example. There was a man who became the darling of New York literary society in the late 1960's. He was in prison for killing someone. He was mentored by the likes of Norman Mailer and other intellectual literati of the time. The fashionable thinking being that the right prison psychologist could rehabilitate any person, they were victims of the system and needed the right care. He even wrote his own book entitled, "In the belly of the Beast", got raves for it. With the help of Mailer and others he was up for parole and released and within a short time killed again. I have never heard Mailer apologize or help the family of this man's victim, even though that would have been the decent thing to do. The man functioned well in the structured prison system, but could not cope with the stresses of regular life and reverted to his "natural man". BTW, there are many prison psychologists who still function this way, getting their personal validation from how many they "cure" regardless of the person's crimes and criminal history. Duffy said how horrible it was for Wes to kill Terry in front of his own wife and child, but Terry was more than willing to do that to Wes, I noticed that wasn't mentioned. People like this will sometimes form families, but the stresses of obligations like a family will often kick out the deviant behavior. Wes' mistake was not disarming Terry in the first place, but in his compassion trying to talk into coming peacefully while Terry reassembled the gun. Ask any cop how easy it is to wrestle a younger, more physically fit antisocial individual to the ground, it' ain't. Ask them what hesitation can cost a police officer, often their life. One night, my father had a suspect get his night stick away from him and he clobbered my dad in the head. The doctor told my mother that if my father had literally not had such a hard skull, we would have been planning a funeral. My dad had a hard time for a long time after that. To put it bluntly, I saw a real ignorance of police procedure and the workings of the criminal mind on display in this presentation. Christ said, "Be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves". I believe that says we can be Christlike people without being naive dupes or victims. I believe we are obligated to forgive others, including people that have done terrible things. I have pondered this many times and concluded that the commandment to do such is for the forgiver as much the one forgiven. It frees the soul not to be mired in bitterness and unable to feel love and joy. But I have also felt it is a process, like grieving and cannot be rushed or forced for it to be real. I think this and many of these same things can be explored in books, essays and on film, but don't blame Richard if this wasn't the film you wanted it to be. I think that's all I have to say for now, maybe more later. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 13:28:52 -0700 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Validation from GA's > I know I would, Darlene. Problem is, we don't seem to have produced many > decent poets. Occasionally, I see a piece of poetry by a Mormon writer that > a) rhymes intelligently and b) has the right (and consistent) meter, but > hardly ever does it actually say something as profound and inspiring as > Wordsworth's immortal lines. Which, if the poem is read in its entirety is really about reincarnation, not pre-existence. Hardly an orthodox Mormon doctrine if you ask me. The poem has NO relevance to Mormon belief unless taken out of context. Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:46:22 -0700 From: Terry L Jeffress Subject: [AML] Website and Review Archive Update Announcement Website Update Announcement =========================== I have updated the staff list to refelect the recent changes in the board and the sad loss of Neila. I have also updated the AML Awards Database to include the awards announced at the Annual Meeting. (Hints to Cherry and Marilyn: I need the citations for Thom Rogers and the Novel Awards.) New Reviews in the AML-List Reviews Archive =========================================== I somehow let all of February go by without an update, so here we have two months worth of AML-List Reviews. We have had a good showing for sheer numbers of reviews. Please remeber this year's challenge, that every member of the AML-List submit at least one review. We have had 35 reviewers submit reviews this year. That leaves over 150 of you who still have just over 9 months to post a review. Remember, we welcome repeat reviews of titles already in the archive. So don't think that just because someone else already posted a review that we don't want to hear from you. 525 A Dance for Three by Louise Plummer reviewed by Andrew R Hall (2 January 2002) 526 Secrets of the Heart by JoAnn Jolley reviewed by Andrew R Hall (2 January 2002) 527 On My Way to Paradise by Dave Wolverton reviewed by Andrew R Hall (2 January 2002) 528 Serpent Catch by Dave Wolverton reviewed by Andrew R Hall (2 January 2002) 529 God's Army by Geoffrey Card reviewed by Andrew R Hall (2 January 2002) 530 Kate's Return by Cheri J. Crane reviewed by Katie Parker (3 January 2002) 531 The Restored Gospel and the Book of Genesis by Kent P. Jackson reviewed by Jeff Needle (7 January 2002) 532 Shadow of the Hegemon by Orson Scott Card reviewed by Preston Hunter (10 January 2002) 533 The Whipping Boy by J. Scott Bronson reviewed by Larry Jackson (11 January 2002) 534 I Hated Heaven: A Novel of Love after Death by Kenny Kemp reviewed by Preston Hunter (11 January 2002) 535 The Millennium File by Glenn L. Anderson reviewed by Preston Hunter (11 January 2002) 536 Dressing like a Mormon guy for only $39.93 by Robert Kirby reviewed by Harlow S. Clark (13 January 2002) 537 A World of Faith by Peggy Fletcher Stack reviewed by Harlow S. Clark (13 January 2002) 538 Of Curious Workmanship by Edgar C. Snow Jr. reviewed by Harlow S. Clark (13 January 2002) 539 The Only Alien on the Planet by Kristen D. Randle reviewed by Preston Hunter (14 January 2002) 540 Damnation Alley by Roger Zelazny reviewed by Preston Hunter (14 January 2002) 541 Rachel's Wedding by Virginia Ellen Baker reviewed by Preston Hunter (14 January 2002) 542 Forever Kate by Cheri J. Crane reviewed by Katie Parker (17 January 2002) 543 God's Army by Geoffrey Card reviewed by D. Michael Martindale (18 January 2002) 544 All I Really Needed to Know I Learned in Primary by Brenton G. Yorgason reviewed by Jeff Needle (18 January 2002) 545 Redemption Road by Northern Voices reviewed by Ivan Angus Wolfe (20 January 2002) 546 My Angelica by Carol Lynch Williams reviewed by Melissa Proffitt (23 January 2002) 547 Traditions about the Early Life of Abraham reviewed by Jeff Needle (23 January 2002) 548 My Peace I Give Unto You by Robert Adlai Lake reviewed by Jeff Needle (23 January 2002) 549 The Call at Evening by Jessie Ward reviewed by Jeff Needle (28 January 2002) 550 Life is Beautiful by Roberto Benigni reviewed by Harlow S. Clark (30 January 2002) 551 Belated Modernity and Aesthetic Culture by Gregory Jusdanis reviewed by William Morris (30 January 2002) 552 House on the Sound by Marilyn Brown reviewed by Jeff Needle (30 January 2002) 553 On Writing: A Memoir on the Craft by Stephen King reviewed by Cathy Gileadi Wilson (1 February 2002) 554 The Singles Ward by Kurt Hale reviewed by Eric D. Snider (4 February 2002) 555 In the Bedroom by Todd Field reviewed by R. W. Rasband (8 February 2002) 556 Rebekah by Orson Scott Card reviewed by D. Michael Martindale (14 February 2002) 557 Hancock County by Tim Slover reviewed by R. W. Rasband (15 February 2002) 558 Good-bye, I Love You by Carol Lynn Pearson reviewed by Jeff Needle (15 February 2002) 559 Out of Step reviewed by Eric D. Snider (15 February 2002) 560 Hancock County by Tim Slover reviewed by Eric D. Snider (21 February 2002) 561 Bound for Canaan by Margaret Blair Young reviewed by Jeff Needle (26 February 2002) 562 Where the Creeks Meet by Lael Littke reviewed by Jeff Needle (4 March 2002) AML-List Review Archive Statistics ================================== Build date: Wednesday, 12 March 2002, 11:28:14 Total reviews: 562 Total reviews this year: 38 Unique posters in 2002: 15 Most Prolific Reviewers - ---------------------------------------------------- Needle, Jeff 81 (14.4%) Rasband, R. W. 34 ( 6.0%) Clark, Harlow S. 33 ( 5.9%) Martindale, D. Michael 31 ( 5.5%) Hall, Andrew R 24 ( 4.3%) Parker, Katie 20 ( 3.6%) Parkin, Scott 13 ( 2.3%) Jeffress, Terry L 12 ( 2.1%) Proffitt, Melissa 11 ( 2.0%) Samuelsen, Eric R. 11 ( 2.0%) Parkinson, Benson 11 ( 2.0%) Snider, Eric D. 10 ( 1.8%) Remy, Jana Bouck 10 ( 1.8%) Most Reviewed Authors - ---------------------------------------------------- Card, Orson Scott 35 ( 6.2%) Young, Margaret Blair 13 ( 2.3%) Dutcher, Richard 9 ( 1.6%) Hughes, Dean 9 ( 1.6%) Lund, Gerald N. 9 ( 1.6%) Parkinson, Benson Y. 9 ( 1.6%) Brown, Marilyn 8 ( 1.4%) Arrington, James 7 ( 1.2%) Payne, Marvin 6 ( 1.1%) Johnson, Sherrie 6 ( 1.1%) Perry, Steven Kapp 6 ( 1.1%) England, Eugene 6 ( 1.1%) Holzapfel, Richard Neitzel 6 ( 1.1%) Williams, Carol Lynch 5 ( 0.9%) Gray, Darius Aidan 5 ( 0.9%) Ryan, Gordon 5 ( 0.9%) Weyland, Jack 5 ( 0.9%) Peck, Lisa J. 5 ( 0.9%) Wolverton, Dave 5 ( 0.9%) Johnson-Choong, Shelly 5 ( 0.9%) Gardner, Lynn 5 ( 0.9%) Most Reviewed Titles - ---------------------------------------------------- Brigham City 7 ( 1.2%) Latter-day Daughters 7 ( 1.2%) MTC, The: Set Apart 7 ( 1.2%) Children of the Promise 6 ( 1.1%) Work and the Glory, The 6 ( 1.1%) Testaments, The 6 ( 1.1%) Standing on the Promises 5 ( 0.9%) Tales of Alvin Maker, The 5 ( 0.9%) Deed of Paksenarrion, The 4 ( 0.7%) Trail of Dreams 4 ( 0.7%) One More River to Cross 4 ( 0.7%) Spirit of Union 4 ( 0.7%) Angel of the Danube 4 ( 0.7%) Wine-dark Sea of Grass, The 4 ( 0.7%) God's Army 4 ( 0.7%) Most Reviewed Publishers - ---------------------------------------------------- Deseret Book 110 (19.6%) Signature Books 56 (10.0%) Bookcraft 45 ( 8.0%) Covenant Communications 40 ( 7.1%) Aspen Books 22 ( 3.9%) Shadow Mountain 19 ( 3.4%) Tor 17 ( 3.0%) Cedar Fort 10 ( 1.8%) - -- Terry L Jeffress | It is a good rule, after reading a new book, South Jordan, UT | never to allow yourself another new one till you | have read an old one in between. -- C. S. Lewis - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #644 ******************************