From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #682 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, April 17 2002 Volume 01 : Number 682 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 15:47:13 -0700 From: "Susan Malmrose" Subject: Re: [AML] Wallace Stegner > Are you suggesting that Stegner was a Jack Mormon? We was not a Mormon > at all, which is, I think, an important distinction. Can someone tell me what a Jack Mormon is? Susan M - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 16:56:24 -0600 From: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] Wallace Stegner on 4/16/02 4:43 PM, Jonathan Langford at jlang2@pressenter.com wrote: > Was Wallace Stegner really ever a Mormon? My understanding was that he was > never a member. Was I misinformed? Never a member. Steve - -- skperry@mac.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 17:55:38 -0500 From: "DCHuls" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Other Side of Heaven_ and Mormon Filmmaking - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tait Family" > Lisa Tait > I am not sure what we expected the movie to be like. I suppose I had = > expected something aimed at a more general audience. For the life of me, = > I can't imagine how anyone who wasn't LDS would be interested in the = > movie, so I've pretty much concluded that it wasn't meant for a more = > general audience? And yet the marketing posters and such seem to suggest = > that it is.=20 > What he "got right" IMO was it matched the book that John Groberg wrote.There was minimal if any embellishment upon his story. Perhaps if you read the book and then reflect on the movie you will get the point the Bishop was making. > I was greatly disappointed at the superficial nature of the film. There = > was no real conflict or complexity to the story or its presentation; it = > was like an extended version of one of the church-produced videos. Those = > things have their place, but it's not the kind of film that seems likely = > to serve as a groundbreaker for mainstream LDS movie making. > If you were looking for something besides what took place in John Grobergs life then it would have been necessary that the production have fiction added. I sense in many of us, myself included, that we frequently want more than the "Real World." It is my impression that this movie was made from a book written from journal and memories of a young missionary putting down what he dared write for public viewing. Was there more? Only John Groberg and Jean Grober really know. Bro and Sis Groberg were on the set, if my memory serves me correctly, and being in their late 60's or early 70's probably didn't want to shock grandchildren or ggrandchildren. Would you want all you may have in your journal on the screen for a national audience? Not me! Sorry to say! Just my two cents worth, probably what it is worth. Craig Huls - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 17:04:19 -0700 From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Wallace Stegner Regarding "Jack Mormon" as used in an earlier post about Stegner-- I thought the term "Jack Mormon" was first coined by the press back in the late 1800's to describe anyone who had sympathies with/for the Mormons. It was only later here in Utah we turned the phrase to mean a baptized person who didn't practice his religion. I also thought that Stegner, while he lived in Utah in his teen years, never joined the church, but affiliated with many members and loved the people. In that light, the original meaning of the term would apply. Kim Madsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 17:18:07 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: [AML] Gen. Conference At 03:27 PM 4/15/02, you wrote: >On another list we were >discussing General Conference. As a rule, I don't find Conference very >interesting, but I watch as much >as I am able. A sacrament meeting speaker in my ward made an interesting point. He compared Conference to King Benjamin's speech. After the king talked, the people who heard or read his messages changed their ways (basically, the whole population) and became good. After Conference. . . . . Well, what did you do after Conference? barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 19:36:46 -0500 From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] re: Mormon Moviegoing Lisa Tait I feel compelled to share my experience at the opening night screening of _The Other Side of Heaven_ last Friday. ... One of the large chain-theaters was showing the movie in one of its small, back-of-the-building theaters. ... By the time the movie started, the theater was full to the front row, ... _______________ How many do you think came to the late show? After the first weekend? Anybody on Sunday? Monday evening? I'll have to drive 84 miles one way to see it. Is it worth the trip? Will it still be there? I had stake meetings opening weekend and youth conference this weekend. I work 10-hour days during the week, so taking 5 hours at night (3 driving and 2 watching) is out of the question. I still wish we could get it here. But the two chains running the 32 screens in our town of 125,000 aren't picking it up. According to the web site, one theater in a town half out size 40 miles away was on the list as a part of the "nationwide opening" weekend, but quickly disappeared from the site. It was listed long enough, however, that the theater manager is still frustrated with the phone calls, and claims he has no say in what their chain sends him. Is this true? Can he just pick up the phone and say, "Send me a print for the week"? Maybe the dollar theater will pick it up. But wait, they're a chain, too. I drove two days to Utah to see Brigham City. (I've still got that review around here somewhere.) And no, I didn't go just for the popcorn. Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 12:29:32 -0500 From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Weekly Box Office Report April 12 Feature Films by LDS/Mormon Filmmakers and Actors Weekend of April 12, 2002 Weekend Box Office Report (U.S. Domestic Box Office Gross) Report compiled by: LDSFilm.com [If table below doesn't line up properly, try looking at them with a mono-spaced font, such as courier - Ed.] Natl Film Title Weekend Gross Rank LDS/Mormon Filmmaker/Actor Total Gross Theaters Days - --- ----------------------------- ----------- ----- ---- 19 The Other Side of Heaven 688,762 306 122 Mitch Davis (writer/director) 2,716,662 John H. Groberg (author/character) Gerald Molen, John Garbett (producers) 46 Ocean's Eleven $77,162 105 129 LDS characters: Malloy twins 183,254,096 65 The Singles Ward 16,844 10 73 Kurt Hale (writer/director) 486,730 John E. Moyer (writer) Dave Hunter (producer) Cody Hale (composer) Ryan Little (cinematographer) Actors: Will Swenson, Connie Young, Daryn Tufts, Kirby Heyborne, Michael Birkeland, Robert Swenson, Lincoln Hoppe, Gretchen Whalley, Sedra Santos, etc. 71 China: The Panda Adventure 12,600 4 262 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 2,193,164 72 Galapagos 12,575 5 899 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 12,571,246 73 Cirque du Soleil: Journey of Man 12,281 3 710 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,201,783 82 Mulholland Drive 6,435 9 189 Joyce Eliason (producer/writer) 7,203,833 106 Mark Twain's America 3D 1,069 1 1382 Alan Williams (composer) 2,188,388 HEAVEN PASSES ARMY: "The Other Side of Heaven" went into nationwide release this week, showing in 306 theaters. It's weekend box office gross was $688,762, putting "Heaven's" total gross at $2,716,662. This means that "Heaven" has surpassed the total box office gross of Richard Dutcher's "God's Army": $2,628,829. This makes "Heaven" the top-grossing "LDS Cinema" film ever released (i.e., a movie made by and about Latter-day Saints). However, "The Other Side of Heaven" still has a ways to go before it can be considered as profitable as "God's Army", since the latter's budget was only $300,000 and "Heaven" cost about $7 million to make. "The Other Side of Heaven" was ranked 19th nationwide, the first time an "LDS Cinema" film has appeared in the national Top 20. The previous best ranking was 24th place, for "The Other Side of Heaven" in its 2nd week of release, when it expaneded from 2 to 15 theaters. Before "Heaven", the highest weekly box office ranking by an "LDS Cinema" film was "Brigham City", which opened in 33rd place nationwide one year ago (April 6th, 2001 -- showing in 51 theaters). Although "only" ranking 19th after its nationwide release, "The Other Side of Heaven" held its own on a per-screen basis. While "Heaven"'s nation-wide release meant that it played in 306 theaters, every film ranked above it but one was playing on at least 586 screens. "Heaven"'s per theater income was $2,251. To compare, "Clockstoppers", which finished the weekend ranked at #7 in terms of gross income, played in 2,512 theaters and had a per theater average of $1,852. Excel Entertainment, the distributor of "The Other Side of Heaven," released a press release on Tuesday pointing out that the movie was ranked #1 nationwide on Monday night in terms of per-screen average. The press release specifically mentioned that this was because Monday night is widely observed as family night. The press release also quoted from Sheila Norman-Culp's largely complimentary Associated Press movie review. The release noted that the "US Conference of Catholic Bishops also applauded the film, calling it 'inspiring [and] sincere.'" Although many movie reviewers from around the nation criticized the events portrayed in "The Other Side of Heaven", the audience response has been overwhelmingly positive. Reviewers almost universally praised the film's cinematography. The movie is expected to top $3 million this weekend, and could easily top $4.5 million within the next two months. YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST: We have received word from a very talented Latter-day Saint film director that he will be directing a new movie this summer. We can't yet tell you who it is, but we can tell you that although he has already directed more than one feature film, none of his feature films have yet been released theatrically -- they've always been released on video. (This description could apply to at least 10 people, so don't be thinking you know who it is.) WEIGH IN: The LDSFilm.com website has just added a page of entertaining interactive polls. The page is at: http://www.ldsfilm.com/p olls.html You can add your vote a variety of questions, such as: What is your favorite "LDS Cinema" movie? What is your favorite movie produced by Jerry Molen? What is your favorite Kieth Merrill film commissoned by the Church? ("Testaments", "Legacy", or "Mr. Krueger's Christmas") Which Tim Slover play would you most like to see as a feature film? Which book by a Latter-day Saint author would you most like to see as a feature film? NELEH WATCH: This week's episode of "Survivor: Marquesas" (known locally as "Survivor: Neleh") featured very little of our favorite castaway. The two tribes merged and the focus was largely on Rob and John (battling for control of the island), and on Kathy (marked for banishment by her back-stabbing former friends, and struggling for survival). Neleh did have one great, hilarious line ("Oh, what outfit should I wear tonight to tribal council?"), which served to break up the incredibly thick tension in the newly-combined tribe. In the beginning of the episode Neleh also discovered a human skull on the island. The good news is that Neleh has made it the final 9 people on the island, and she is guaranteed a spot on the last episode -- either as one of the final two competitors, or one of the jurors whose vote determines the winner. According to the "Next Episode" blurb, next week's episodewill feature some focus on Neleh, but she may be in trouble... - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 20:42:00 -0500 From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] Re: Sanitized LDS History? Thom Duncan: If the testimony is based on correct principles, then it should withstand any test. ... Now nothing phases me. Jeff Needle: One good member said to me, "It may be that the words themselves don't seem very important, but isn't the fact that a Prophet is saying them make them more important?" In a semi-comic response, I asked, "If the Prophet read from the telephone directory, would that make it inspired?" It was answered, "Yes." I winced. _______________ Larry Jackson responds: Part I -- Thom In his younger days, while working for the railroad during the war, a train derailed coming down the canyon into Salt Lake. To finish clearing the tracks and get the trains moving again, Gordon Hinckley had a derailed car rolled into the river.* This was an excellent and cost effective management decision. And it drove the food storage folks batty. "Waste not, want not." As President Hinckley, he has said those very words himself. I think the phrase "penny-wise and pound-foolish" is not well known among penny-pinchers and savers. My wonderful wife will drive 7 miles to buy gasoline a penny a gallon cheaper. On 15 gallons, she saves 15 cents, and spends over 1/2 a gallon of gas (at $1.25/gal -- eat your hearts out) or 62 cents doing it. Net loss, 47 cents. Every time she does it, I give her two extra quarters for the food budget. I agree with Thom that understanding correct principles can help me understand why two conflicting actions, rolling the box car into the river and saving food storage, can each be correct under the right circumstances. In my experience, those correct principles are usually better understood when I have a more complete picture of a situation than I usually have. I find this to be true in many of my LDS history readings, as well. Part II -- Jeff As members of a ward council were gathering, preliminary chat turned to the "good in principle" but "odd in exact boundary lines" division between the two wards in the city. Some thought the lines made rather unusual twists and turns in places. Others were reassuring that the division of the two wards was "inspired by priesthood leaders" and was done the way the Lord wanted. The bishop just listened and smiled. After most had firmly taken sides on the issue, the bishop turned to one of his counselors and asked him to show the council how the priesthood leaders at the time had been inspired to divide the ward. The counselor reached back, pulled out the phone book and, without saying a word, dropped it on the bishop's desk with a loud thud. The bishop then said the ward clerk would continue the presentation. An older brother pulled a 3x5 card out of his pocket and said, "The following zip codes are in our ward." He listed 5 or 6. "The following zip codes are in the other ward." He listed them. "As the ward clerk, I am responsible for seeing that membership records are in the proper ward according to the addresses of the members. I'm here to tell you that this is the most inspired method of determining ward boundaries in a city that I have ever seen." After we all had a good laugh (they had obviously done this routine before), the bishop followed up by saying that the Lord expected us to use the resources we had to solve our problems, and that part of our inspiration came in how and when to use those resources. So yes, Jeff. Sometimes reading from the telephone directory is inspired. In my experience, however, it is normally a clerk rather than a prophet who makes it so. Larry Jackson * (Mormon Literature connection, reference Sheri Dew's biography of President Hinckley, one of the pages early on in the book, and probably the sanitized version of the story, but we won't go into that right here and now.) ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 22:05:30 EDT From: HOJONEWS@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Latter-day Saints on the Silver Screen In a message dated 4/16/02 2:50:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time, barbara@techvoice.com writes: > > Cool! He was the guy who drove the elders around and it took a miracle to > get him to see the light? He was great! > > Yes. If you see it again, note the dimples (under the scraggly old beard) and the light in those eyes! It was his first screen role. Carolyn Howard-Johnson, Author of This is the Place, an award-winning story about a young journalist who writes her way through repression into redemption - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 20:20:54 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Sanitized LDS History? Thom Duncan wrote: > If, OTOH, I had been taught to test the revelations of the Brethren and not > to just "Follow the Brethren," there would have been less of a problem when > I learn about those instances he had taught incorrect ideas. and > This conflicts with the much more prevelant message, "Follow the Brethren." > That's where the problem lies, imo. At least it did for me. I think Thom makes an excellent point--we are told over and over by the Brethren that we need to work out our own understanding through prayer and study and sincere pondering. I'm not convinced that the two are mutually exclusive, and I'm not sure errors by the Brethren (or even the Prophet) should be substantial reasons to lose one's faith. That's the basis of Scott's Private Heresy #1--that the private religion that exists within our minds is beholden to no orthodoxy except that which we ourselves impose on it, including GAs, parents, or other spritiual advisors. In the end it's between God and each of us as individuals. And when Thom tells his story of frustration or anger or even betrayal--in the context of his ongoing faith and active membership in the Church despite some hard spiritual times--he creates an opportunity for others who may feel similarly to see a way through frustration and toward strengthened faith. I think this is part of why Mormons resonate so strongly with personal essays--while we may disagree sometimes with the conclusions that others come to, the personal essay form usually provides enough context for us to at least understand the nature and source of those beliefs. Rejecting actual experience is much harder to do than rejecting a fictional story. I am somewhat ashamed to admit that though I knew Gene England for many years before his death, I never read a single one of his essays during that time. I knew of them, and knew that he was well respected for having written them. But I thought I had Gene figured--he was a Sunstoner and had been called to repentence by the Brethren, after all--and that reading his essays would only tell me what I already knew and didn't care much to hear again. Of course I was wrong. I've been working my way through his collection _Making Peace_ and loving it. Interestingly, though I've only read the first four essays in the volume, I find that each of them has been specifically relevant in some way to my own life and search for religious and philosophical foundations (and many of the discussions here on AML-List). One talks about spectral evidence and our tendency to make sweeping generalizations about people we disagree with, based on a partial (aka incomplete) understanding of both the person and the opinion. He names that tendency as a sin and compares it directly to the hysteria that led to the Salem witch trials. Another proposes that Utah Mormons should become Democrats in order to ensure that the political process is informed on all sides by righteous people, not just those with axes to grind. He offers an interesting historical glimpse into the Mormon political landscape of the late 1800s and shows how relevant those glimpses are to our modern culture. In another he talks about educational theory, Brigham Young, and the importance of pursuing knowledge to a purpose--understanding not just the how, but the why of things. He talked about the potential (and to a very great degree the failure) of BYU to provide the *most* open and unfettered inquiry into any subject--including those that good and righteous people disagree on. At one point he talks about his own conflict with the Brethren over the years, and in particular his experiences at and after the 1992 Sunstone Symposium. He reveals both a humble heart, and a powerfully examined faith. He also comments about the counsel to follow the Brethren and how they often disagree with each other, and why the counsel is to "follow the Brethren" rather than "follow the Brother." While they are called to be special witnesses, they are not necessarily ordained to infallibility, or even agreement on many issues. In his essays Gene England manages to disagree without condemning, and to sometimes dissent without fanfare. In other words, he tells stories of his own life and experience--not with the intent of cramming his wisdom down our throats, but apparently with a desire to understand and explain and share. He had his own private heresies, and required that no one else accept them. I think that's a key element--he shared. That his sharing results in teaching is a good thing. But I think his intent was not to show us all how silly we are and to present himself as the enlightened master, but rather to share with us his own struggles and challenges and occasional sillinesses so that we can understand one person's viewpoint. I believe that by doing so he enlarges and extends the range and power to include of the community of the Saints. Good stuff. I strongly recommend Gene England's essays to any Mormon reader (a recent issue of Irreantum focused on Brother England--the least expensive collection of his essays on the market today). He was never afraid to tell his own stories--even, or perhaps especially, when he found himself cast in the role of the confused or misguided character. You may not always agree with his opinions or conclusion, but you can't help but appreciate his thoughtfulness. Story has enormous power, be it history, essay, fiction, or conversations on an email discussion list. If we can learn to tell our stories honestly and with humility, I think we have the power to not only build the community of Saints, but the kindgom of God as well--in our own hearts, where it most matters. FWIW. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 20:24:16 -0700 From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] Meeting at Pasadena Sunstone Will anyone be in Pasadena for Sunstone this weekend? I'll be there, and will be glad to meet any listers who might be on hand. - ---------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 21:32:50 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Nature Writing Oh sure, why not. Everyone else has chipped in and I hate to be left out of a party... Todd Petersen wondered: > However, a good many Utah Mormons (and other types) are vigorously > (one could say: venomously) anti-environment and anti-wilderness. Some comments, and a question-- At the risk of forcing our esteemed Moderator to call a halt to the discussion, what specific behaviors cause you to label many Utah Mormons as either anti-wilderness or anti-environment? My own experience suggests that most people take few or no stances on environmental issues (I would argue that non-environmentalism isn't the same thing as anti-environmentalism), though quite a few take the idea of self-governance and self-determination very seriously (more on that in a minute). Just curious, because I hear the charge made a lot but I don't really see much of it myself. Of course a good many Utah Mormons are very pro-environment and pro-wilderness. I live in a central Utah community that plans its city meetings around the various hunts, and whose population dwindles to about one-third its normal size during the summer when nearly everyone heads out to one cabin, lake, trail, or retreat or another to commune with nature. As a non-hunter I remain unsure whether hunting constitutes an elevated respect for nature, or a diminished one. Whichever it is, an awful lot of Mormons do it. As others have pointed out, I think a lot of people are not so much anti-environment as they are anti-environmentalist. It seems to me as though many people who have destroyed their own local natural environments take it as their act of penance to come out to my state and force me to save mine--on their terms and conditions. I know that tendency for any outsider to come into Utah and tell us what policies we must have or what laws we must institute raises the hackles of many a Mormon who still mistrusts the motives of many an outsider who comes to tell us how to carry out our business. I think this self-determination thing has a lot to do with it. Mormons came to Utah to escape being told how to live their lives. We were eventually hunted down, reacquired into the United States, and concquered as an independent people. We were forced to comply with the governmental systems and requirements of an invading force, complete with armies and police actions. We were imprisoned in direct violation of the laws of that nation, and forced to give up a certain portion of our religion in order to be accepted into that union. That may all be ancient history, but it is part of the spirit of this place that all we ask for is the right to determine our own path--be it in religion, education, politics, or environmental policy. Perhaps a doctrinal basis for a diminished sense of environmental activism could be an extension of the idea that the earth was given to Adam and Eve to subdue, and all things are decreed for the use of Man. Of course part of a stewardship is responsible management, but I suspect that many view nature as one of the elements given to Man to master. My own attitude falls somewhere in the middle of it all. I admire nature, but am not particularly drawn to it except in well-tended, carefully defined ways. Part of that was my suburban upbringing and the sense that nature was dirty and dangerous. Unpredictable, and thus scary. I like nature, but I like it best when it's *over there* and can't hurt me. Of course I really like it when "over there" is only a few minutes' drive down the road, and I specifically chose my residence because it was on the line between civilization and wilderness. In other words, I'm not anti-environment so much as a-environment. I hear good arguments on all sides and the view from both my front and back window seems spectacularly natural and organic and peaceful, so I don't feel as much pressure to fix a problem I can't see when there are issues of human welfare that I can see and want to fix. I'm just not sure I see the aggressive anti-environmentalism. At least not in my central Utah town. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 21:35:36 -0600 From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Nature Writing Jim Picht said I don't think there's anything about our church or our art and literature that's anti-environment. I heard one Mormon say that it's not important to worry about pollution because the earth will be restored during the Milleneum. There's one example. Jim also said: If there's anything we hate, it's being compelled to deal with our stewardship as someone else sees fit. You deal with your back yard and leave me to tend mine. My answer is that your back yard is directly connected to mine, and things you do in it, might adversely affect mine. The people in Libby, MT are learning that right now. The arsenic from gold mines that were legally operating and breaking no laws (until recently) was leaching into the drinking water and killing people at an alarming rate. At that point, you must agree that someone has to say this kind of thing is wrong, even if what's going on is legal and in "your" backyard and not mine. Water is shared, air is shared. So one can't draw boundaries like property lines. - -- Todd Robert Petersen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 22:31:32 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Nature Writing Todd Petersen wrote: > So what's the deal? And why aren't there more LDS nature writers. > Science Fiction is popular, but not writing that deals with the planet > we already have. Except that sf is now and nearly always has been a way of telling stories *specifically* about this planet, its conditions, and its inhabitants by using other worlds as a foil for discussing those issues. Except for the very specifically science-oriented stuff, the actual stories are about people interacting with each other and their environment. The metaphor is obvious--one of the consistent charges levelled against sf, in fact. You ask where the LDS environmentalist writers are. I suggest you look a little more closely at sf to find some of those missing Mormons. M. Shayne Bell has been a passionate environmentalist writer. So has Virginia Baker and Susan Kroupa. Dave Wolverton deals not only with human interaction, but with environmental issues in his works. Even Orson Scott Card has gotten a few digs in. Sf in general has a fairly strong affinity for issues of environment, be they warning stories of the environmental catastrophes associated with global warming or nuclear devastation or asteroid impact, or more intimate explorations of individuals dealing with their local flora and fauna--either Terrestrial, or non. I understand that sf is not your thing, but it may be the writing that most consistently and directly addresses issues of environmental responsibility and concern--both within the Mormon community and outside it. Whether you like the artistry of it or not, sf is getting to more readers nationwide with its treatments of environmental issues than most of the straight nature writers are. Part of that, I think, is that sf stories are usually about the environment *and something else.* People read sf for the inventiveness and speculation and get a bonus environmental comment as well, which opens the audience to both those interested in environmental issues and those just interested in funky stories--as opposed to catering only to those who are largely converted and specifically interested in nature issues. Oddly, sf tends to be a little less heavy handed about it than many of the nature writers who seem bent on brow-beating me into submission with a very focused (and often unvarying) repetition of the same message. A trojan horse instead of a shovel to the face--often a beautifully wrought, artistically admirable shovel, but a shovel nonetheless. I know that growing up it seemed like the only Mormon stories I could find were about communing with nature and finding God there. As a child of the suburbs (San Francisco, Denver, Washington D.C., and Chicago) I felt like I didn't belong among Mormons because I had little or no interest in sitting in the bushes waiting to kill an animal--which apparently meant that I had little or no chance of communing with God. To me Mormon literature has been so informed by the Western writing tradition (often focused around communing with nature in an effort to find Self) that I find myself happy to finally see some Mormon writers who aren't equating all authentic spirituality with desert communion. But that's a different discussion, and underscores what I perceive to be an overabundance of rural Utah stories as defining *the* true Mormon experience. I just don't see sf as stealing shelf space from nature writers, and I do see sf as dealing with nature and environmental issues more often and more passionately than most other kinds of Mormon writing. Or so it seemes to me. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 05:40:39 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] Sanitized LDS Historical Fiction? Just as discribing the faults of past Church leaders makes some members uncofortable, portraying faults in historical fiction also rubs some the wrong way. Particularly if the the reader is given a significant amount of POV time in a biblical/historical charachter's head. The recent discussion of history reminds me of criticism of some of Orson Scott Card's historical fiction, such as his portrayal of Joseph Smith in _Saints_. More recently, his novel _Rebekah_ has been similarly criticized. Card certainly portrays his charachters as real revelation-recieving disciples of a real God, but also as people who make mistakes, sometimes cause thier loved ones pain, and sometimes act bull-headedly. I liked it. One recent reviewer who disliked the style of Card (I am using a new Japanese keyboard, and I can not find the apostrophe key) is Jennie Hansen, a writer with many novels published by Covenant. The review appeared in Meridian Magazine. http://www.meridianmagazine.com/books/020220rebekah.html She wrote, There is something reminiscent in these books of the Broadway musical Hair which reduces Jesus to just a man and the treatment of these revered Old Testament giants, who in Card's portrayal, become just another group of too-human, squabbling, covered-with-warts people. . . . Many readers find something distasteful in an author presuming to place his own thoughts and feelings inside the mind and mouth of persons with the stature of Abraham and Sarah or Rebekah and Isaac. These people, who are much more than characters in a book, deserve the dignity of being viewed through the eyes of parallel characters. . . . Card's Rebekah is stubbornly arrogant, a modern day feminist, and a woman who acts from impulse rather than direction from God. (End quote--I have got to figure out this keyboard) First of all, I disagre that depicting human frailities of past individuals somehow depreciates them. And Hansen goes to far in saying that Rebekah acts without direction from God. On the contrary, Card depicts her as receiving quite clear messages from God, more clear then those that her husband Isaac receives (the exception is the final part about deceiving Isaac, which Card depicts as a wrong thing to do). Secondly, I am interested in the idea of Hansen (sigh) that prophetic charachters should be respected by viewing them from secondary charachters. I supposed Lund is an example of this. I guess I understand her reasoning, but I sure do not agree. These are some of the most fascinating charachters to examine. I am interested in imagining what goes through the head of a great person. I would like to be a great person, so I would like to imagine and see depictions of such people from the inside as well as the outside. Sure, we all know it is fiction. That is another thing which bugs me about many reviews of historical fiction, reviewers seem to fear that we will accept the fictional parts as real history. Give us some credit, if a reader is interested in biblical fiction, that person has probably read those parts of the Bible already. You do not need to protect us, Mom and Dad reviewer. Elsewhere in the review Hansen recomends that readers stick with the historical fiction of Gerald Lund and David G. Woolley (a Covenant author who is doing a series on the Book of Mormon). I think Lund is getting better, but I certainly would reccomend Card or Young/Gray as being far superior authors to Lund and Woolley. Andrew Hall Fukuoka, Japan _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 09:15:45 -0600 From: margaret young Subject: Re: [AML] Sanitized LDS History? Well, before Jonathan pulls the plug on this thread, let me just add something. It has been very interesting to read various posts on sanitized history while at the same time receiving e-mails from people who are struggling to stay in the Church because of things they've just found out about past prophets. This week, I had a desperate call from a missionary in Atlanta. He and his companion had taught a black woman who was ready for baptism and had chosen her date. Then--Monday, I believe--she got hit with all the anti stuff--things said in the past about race. Yesterday, I got an e-mail from a recent convert (also black) who said she didn't think she could remain in the Church because of what she had read about past statements regarding race. She said, "If a prophet said something that is untrue, how can he be a prophet?" I won't detail my responses, but these things we're talking about intellectually are very real barriers in many people's lives. Interestingly, this week I was also told that many in the Church consider that the "race issue" is over. It's not a problem anymore. Hmmmm. Somebody hasn't gotten that message south, I don't think. [Margaret Young] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #682 ******************************