From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #703 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, May 8 2002 Volume 01 : Number 703 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 11:53:07 -0600 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Talent Search: Actor for Joseph Smith On Fri, 03 May 2002 01:12:34 -0600, D. Michael Martindale wrote: >> The actor chosen to portray this role must be of high moral >> character in his personal life as well as on screen. > >"In his personal life" I understand, but "on screen" absolutely baffles >me. How is the actor going to lead an immoral life on screen? At least >without the director and editor being in cahoots with him. > That sounds like a very awkward way of saying the actor shouldn't have portrayed any immoral acts or characters in his previous film work. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 May 2002 23:13:29 -0700 From: JLTyner Subject: [AML] Church News Articles In the most recent issue of The Church News there were a couple of notable articles. One is particularly noteworthy around the recent thread of Sharing Experiences. It is titled "Mackenzies's dance" "A Young Woman's Battle With Eating Disorders" "Family Hopes Her Story Will Help Others" The byline is by Sarah Jane Weaver, staff writer. It is a long article taking almost three full pages with sidebars included. But what really stands out about this article is it's brutal honesty. It is not a feel good article and the pain portrayed is still fresh. The subject of the article, Mackenzie Fullmer died Feb. 11, 2002 after a three year battle with eating disorders, she was only 18. The article chronicles things her family think contributed to it, statistics, the problems with finding competent treatment programs and the batttles with insurance and what happens when it runs out and you child still needs treatment and the incredible amount of their own money her parents spent to get her help. There is an interesting quote from her mother Shari, "It just had a hold on her-she couldn't break free. We blamed ballet and still do. We blamed the insurance company and still do. We blamed the media and still do. We blamed our society and still do. We blamed ourselves and still do." They go on to talk about the intense pressure their daughter felt to excel. They even had one of the men who gave their daughter a priesthood blessing say afterwards that he did think the trial was over. No happy talk about any of this and no fudging about the spiral this young woman descended into and how helpless her family and friends felt. Considering the level of perfectionism we Latter-day Saints put on ourselves and each other and how frustrating it is having a family member with medical challenges and trying to find the right treatment, I found this to be a timely article and unusually frank for The Church News. The other article has a happier ending. It is about a Seminary teacher who donated one of his kidneys to one of his students. The challenge for this young man's family is the fact that he is adopted and unable to be matched to any of his family members. The article does well to document the decision process the donor went through with study, prayer and practical considerations, but I wished it would have also emphasized the difficulty it is to find a non-related living donor, the chances of him having been a match were low. Even between people who are related, first cousins for instance, the chances of being a compatible match are only about 10 %. The teacher even being a suitable match is a minor miracle in and of itself. It even has some added drama with the young man having an allergic reaction to the anesthesia and the kidney not functioning at first. I would highly recommend these two articles. The link is: www.ldschurchnews.com Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 12:51:51 -0600 From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Disney Morals? ___ Kellene ___ | Without knowing that the statement came from Clark, I would | have bet money that it almost certainly came from a man! :-) | (how's that for a stereotypical statement.) | | There is absolutely a very real distinction between romance | and sex. ___ Let us be clear that sex as sexuality is not the same as sex as "coitus" or related acts. Unfortunately our society tends to confuse that more than a little. Even for men sexuality is primarily a psychology. That's why you see so many sexual images in the media. That only works because of the psychological aspects of sexuality, even for men. Yet it involves nothing of what you designate as sex. While I certainly don't deny that there are important differences between male and female sexuality, the fact is that for both it is primarily psychological rather than just a certain set of physical acts. But this psychological aspect is by that fact very "literary." (That literary aspect is what allowed Freud and others to develop psychoanalytic approaches which really are nothing more than literary criticism of narratives given by patients) Further this literary aspect of sex is *always* about relationships. What does this mean? Well "romance" is simply one form of sexual relating. Further it is one that emphasizes the psychological communication over the more physical communication. Romance is a kind of story telling in which I act out a narrative to my partner which they "read" and then interpret in a fairly sexual manner. Don't agree? Ask yourself whether you'd look at romance the same way before and after puberty. Further romance is couched in very socially defined literary types, tropes and settings. While there are common features in all civilizations, the fact is that we tend to adopt our stories from other stories. Allow me a recent example. I took a date out to a rooftop overlooking the city with some romantic music and dance under the stars, I've constructed a kind of narrative. Why is that romantic? Because of my and my date's familiarity with other literature (both acted and written) that is romantic - which deals with sexual relationships. Now in that date there was nothing really that overtly sexual. Other than a bit of kissing, all the sexual elements were primarily narrative rather than relating to what we might call the base biology of sexuality. Even in the animal kingdom though you'll find this kind of narration tied to sexuality. (And thus it probably isn't purely separably from biology) When a female songbird judges a mate on the basis of their song, we are speaking of a kind of romantic relationship. Obviously it is not as complex as our own romances, but a romance nonetheless. Yet that narrative is not yet the sexual act. But it is sexual. Further what the female bird is doing is judging the male on its narrative skill. So when you later give the example of a marriage "that has plenty of romance, and there's not an iota of sex in it" you really are wrong. Not is saying that there is plenty of romance. Rather you are wrong in saying that there isn't any sex in it. - -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 13:45:55 -0600 From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: RE: [AML] Utah Arts Grants >>> Chris.Bigelow@UnicityNetwork.com 05/01/02 04:03PM >>> > >The panel members making the grant decisions this year include the >following. I've made a few annotations--anyone know anything more? >Lisa Bickmore, 3303 W 7675 S, West Jordan, UT 84084-3660 Lisa Orme Bickmore is a professor of English at Salt Lake Community College. She has published in scholarly and literary journals, received a Utah Arts Council award for poetry, and was an invited guest participant in the prestigeous Westminster College poetry series. She reads regularly at CityArts and elsewhere. She and her husband, John McCormick, live in Salt Lake City. (From the web page for her book, _Haste: Poems_ <>) MBA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 13:58:16 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Money and Art > Also, even King Benjamin worked in the fields along with his people. > What makes LDS writers think they don't need to do the same? Most of us do, I suspect. But if the tax money I've paid out over the years can come back to me in some form of an arts grant, I'd be nuts not to take it. If I could make a living off my art, I'm more likely to be able to do more art. Thom - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 14:01:26 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Money and Art > of writing skills. Fame ain't bad, either. At first, I suppose it is. Talk to me in twenty years when all you still have is fame. I suspect you will think differently. I remember the thrill I had when my first novel was published in 1990. I saw it in the bookstores. How cool. Ten years later, the book hasn't sold out its original printing. Fame? Hah! Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 13:29:43 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Frankness in Mormon Writing <<< We have a double standard toward sex in the LDS culture. I don't mean the double standard that insists women remain chaste and modestly dressed, while men do what they want. I'm talking about the lip service we give to the doctrine that sex is a precious thing, a gift of God, the "very key" of the plan of salvation as Boyd K. Packer once said in a General Conference speech that was adapted to a filmstrip for seminary students. But when it comes to our actions, we show that we still buy into the old Protestant notion that sex is a dirty necessity. >>> Here's my take on it, from my missionary memoir: For me, Mormonism had started clicking into place during a missionary preparation class across the street from the University of Utah. One afternoon the instructor asked us, "What is our most basic, fundamental doctrine, the concept everything else is built on?" Someone raised his hand and said, "Faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost." "Yes, those are the first principles of the gospel, but go deeper," the instructor said. A woman who was leaving the next week for Taiwan said, "Proclaim the gospel, perfect the members, and redeem the dead?" "The threefold mission of the church is central," the instructor said. "But that's not the core doctrine." I raised my hand, and the instructor nodded at me. "Jesus is our savior?" "Yes, of course he's crucial. Nothing would be possible without him. But the Savior and all these other things are the means to an end. What is that end?" "I know," said a man with several empty piercings visible in his ears. "We are the literal offspring of God." "Bingo," said the instructor. "The prophet Lorenzo Snow said it best: 'As man is, God once was, and as God is, man may become.' That's the essence of Mormonism. People think it's blasphemous to say we can eventually become like Heavenly Father. But I think it's blasphemous to say Jesus suffered and died for anything less." The instructor put a cartoon on the overhead projector of a man sitting on a cloud with wings, a halo, and a harp. The caption said I wish I brought a magazine. "That says it all," the instructor said. "No one but us really understands the purpose of life and what we'll be doing in the afterlife." As I listened, I decided that despite Mormonism's bland exterior, deep down it was a cool religion. The offspring of giraffes grew up to be giraffes. The offspring of mosquitoes grew up to be mosquitoes. The offspring of God grew up to be gods. Duh. "The thing is, the Savior clearly states this so-called blasphemous doctrine right in the Bible," the instructor said. "'Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Heavenly Father is perfect.' If you look up the word perfect, it means to bring to final form, to satisfy all requirements, to faithfully reproduce the original. It also means to be sexually mature and fully differentiated, which is what Heavenly Father and Mother are on an eternal scale. Jesus is clearly telling us to become like Heavenly Father-not just telling us, commanding us. Who can remind us what it means to become like Heavenly Father?" The Taiwan woman spoke up again. "It means having trillions of spirit children and creating planets where they can be tested. But I have a question. I heard someone say the Holy Ghost is really Heavenly Mother. It makes sense she'd want to whisper to her own children and comfort them." "Oh, Pamela," the instructor said, holding up his hands as if to block her. "That is not what we believe. That is an apostate doctrine. Please don't teach it to anybody." Pamela folded her arms across her chest. Her idea sounded appealing to me. Why didn't we ever hear anything about Heavenly Mother? Surely God didn't just keep her barefoot and pregnant all the time, with no higher role. I tried to imagine what kind of human being God had been during his test on some earthlike planet, perhaps one where the sky was green and chlorophyll was blue. I pictured him as a humble farmer in a pre-industrial civilization. Soon after that class session, I stumbled across a revelatory Mark Twain passage in one of my literature classes across the street. After visiting Utah, Twain had mocked polygamy and called the Book of Mormon "chloroform in print." However, in a literature anthology with pages as thin as scripture, I found excerpts from Twain's Letters from the Earth that made me fully understand what Mormonism really meant. In a letter describing earthly human life to his heavenly friends, Twain's undercover archangel wrote: He has imagined a heaven, and has left entirely out of it the supremest of all his delights, the one ecstasy that stands first and foremost in the heart of every individual of his race-and of ours-sexual intercourse! The very thought of it excites him; opportunity sets him wild; in this state he will risk life, reputation, everything-even his queer heaven itself-to make good that opportunity and ride it to the overwhelming climax. From youth to middle age all men and women prize copulation above all other pleasures combined, yet it is actually as I have said: it is not in their heaven, prayer takes its place. The archangel added a comment about how inferior mortal sex was: At its very best and longest the act is brief beyond imagination-the imagination of an immortal, I mean. In the matter of repetition the man is limited-oh, quite beyond immortal conception. We who continue the act and its supremest ecstasies unbroken and without withdrawal for centuries, will never be able to understand or adequately pity the awful poverty of these people in that rich gift which, possessed as we possess it, makes all other possessions trivial and not worth the trouble of having. It all fell into place: Mortality gave everyone a test drive of sexual powers, but only Mormonism opened the way for sex in the afterlife. Mormonism was spiritual Darwinism, survival of the fittest on an eternal scale. Unless a person recognized that Mormonism held the keys of the expanding universe and faithfully lived its principles, he or she would not enter the eternal gene pool. Those who didn't get sealed in the temple with a spouse and fully tap into Christ's atonement would be "ministering angels," the equivalent of nannies and housekeepers for those who earned the opportunity to keep procreating. I imagined that, somewhere in the spirit world, Mark Twain had already accepted at least one of the numerous proxy baptisms probably already performed for him. As for the Australians, how could they possibly resist Mormonism's logic after hearing the real story? <<< I think the debate over the difference between romantic love and sex comes from this suspicious attitude. Many on this list have wished, with a weariness that comes through in their words, that they could read a book or watch a movie without sex always intruding. I feel somewhat differently about this. I grow weary of the suspicion Mormons have about sex. >>> One of the main reasons why John Updike is perhaps my favorite writer is that he always folds in some healthy realism about sex (it's often immoral sex, but it still reflects human reality). I was quite delighted when, in an Updike interview published in WRITER magazine last year, he referred to that very same Twain quote I included above. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 14:16:58 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] British Copyeditor Needed A friend of mine is looking for a British copyeditor. The person does not have to live in Utah County, but she would prefer someone who is British so they definitely know all the spelling and lingo preferences. Please contact her directly at Janell Aslett [jaslett@myfamilyinc.com]. She sounded like it's fairly urgent, so don't delay. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 16:00:43 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Frankness in Mormon Writing - ---Original Message From: D. Michael Martindale > I'll never forget the sacrament meeting where a woman speaker > was raised in a home with "an open attitude toward S-E-X." > It's one of those times I wished chapel pews came equipped > with seatbelts, because I nearly fell out of mine. She was > raised with an open attitude about sex, but couldn't bring > herself to utter the word in sacrament meeting. Couldn't? You have no evidence that she couldn't bring herself to utter the word in sacrament meeting. Being comfortable about discussing sex doesn't mean you should feel free to discuss it in any forum imaginable. Sacrament meeting is a good example of a situation where it is inappropriate to discuss sex, not because the topic is dirty or shameful, but because it is simply an inappropriate setting. I don't consider the temple endowment dirty or shameful, but I don't think sacrament meeting is an appropriate setting for discussing it, either. With sex, even uttering the word can be inappropriate depending on the circumstances because of the weight and intimacy of the topic. > Doesn't that > just sum up the suspicious attitude Mormons have toward sex? > > We have a double standard toward sex in the LDS culture. I > don't mean the double standard that insists women remain > chaste and modestly dressed, while men do what they want. I'm > talking about the lip service we give to the doctrine that > sex is a precious thing, a gift of God, the "very key" of the > plan of salvation as Boyd K. Packer once said in a General > Conference speech that was adapted to a filmstrip for > seminary students. But when it comes to our actions, we show > that we still buy into the old Protestant notion that sex is > a dirty necessity. Some people might have this suspicious attitude or Puritan notions, but I don't think that Mormons in general do. We are very sensitive of context and situations for discussion, but that is only appropriate for something we hold so sacred that is so easily, and frequently, degraded. I don't think that our reluctance is due to shame (in general). In fact, our beliefs about its sacred nature and importance and beauty are what *drive* our reluctance. We don't cast our pearls before swine, we don't discuss the temple ceremonies outside of the temple, we are *not* open about anything and everything. That is a *good* thing, not something to castigate. Sex has meaning, it is intimate, it is something we discuss only when we are in the appropriate context for the discussion. That is not at all the same thing as shame. I have the privilege of being considered a sensitive man. As such, I have been in situations where I was surrounded by women and considered part of the group--someone they could trust to be sensitive in ways they trust. I have heard the discussions they have about sex. Believe me, there is nothing shy or shameful in those discussions. If men are less likely to have such discussions, it is probably because men are so seldom so intimate or open about things in general. > In all the church lessons, Sunday sermons, seminary classes, > and temple sessions I've experienced, never once have I heard > the law of chastity defined as, "Thou shalt pretend sex does > not exist." It's not a sin to acknowledge the existence of > sex, to talk about sex, to discuss sex, to write about sex, > or--dare I say it?--even joke about sex. So when I do any of > these things, why do so many of my fellow Saints look at me > like I have sinned? I don't know if you have sinned or not, but it is just possible that you chose an inappropriate setting to bring up sex. I have heard, very rarely, a joke involving sex in Gospel Doctrine followed by a delightful chuckle and appreciative nods. But that is rare because it is so rarely appropriate--not because sex is a hidden and shameful act. Sometimes sacred really *does* mean secret--or at least restricted, private, and appropriately self-censured. > As with most things in life, sex can be disrespected, > defiled, abused, or wielded as a weapon to harm others. But > the opposite of defilement is not silence; the opposite of > abuse is not ignoring the existence of something. Chastity is > not born of shame and embarrassment. You forgot "flaunted" in your list. And that is the most common abuse. Brittney Spears can talk all she wants about how she is a virgin and how important she thinks sex is, but her actions tell an entirely different story. She exudes, flaunts, practically shouts sex in all that she does from the clothing she wears, the lyrics she sings, and the movements of her dance. I cannot see her without a frown and a little disgust that something I hold so sacred and find so much joy in is being publicly debased by a child with so very little understanding. > Sex can be indulged in when there is no romantic love to > express. Sex can be exploited for financial gain. Sex can be > used as a form of violence. These things cheapen it, defile > it. But in no rational logic system does it therefore follow > that anyone who talks about it--even frankly--is sinning. Sure, there *are* appropriate times to discuss and/or express sex. But there are also times when it is *in*appropriate. Anyone who talks about sex in certain contexts, while maybe not sinning, are at least cheapening something I hold sacred and I will not hesitate to either remove myself or express my displeasure. > So let Disney make their "sex-laced" movies, and when they go > too far for the young audience, like with Hunchback and > Pocahontas, don't support it. But let's also talk about sex > more in our lives, in our sermons, our discussions, and in > our literature. Let's not hide from it, leaving all > references to and images of sex to the world, thereby losing > by default. I say, bring on the sex! You can bring it on all you want. But, I won't be a participant. Oh, I don't want us to be so hesitant about it that it never comes up. Sex does have its place in our stories and art. It has a place in our sermons and discussions. But that place is not universal. And sexual details are so rarely appropriate that I don't expect to encounter them in *any* public forum I participate in. As far as I'm concerned, we already talk plenty about sex in our lives, sermons, discussions, and literature. I don't agree at all with your call to make it more common, to discuss it more often. > It _is_ a gift of God, after all. I don't discuss or share every gift of God. In fact, gifts of God deserve respect and care. I have experienced more than one occasion when the spirit told me not to share a thought or experience I had planned to share. I don't display my garments for all to see, I don't discuss the temple endowment outside of the temple, I don't share details of my sex life with anybody (um, yet, I suppose there could arise circumstances where it would be appropriate, but I expect that to be very rare). God expects us to pursue every good gift in the measure he has given it. We need to seek the balance and priorities of God. They are His gifts, after all, and not our own to do with as we please. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 16:03:40 -0600 From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] Money and Art On Fri, 03 May 2002 18:05:49 -0600 "Todd Petersen" writes: > Also, even King Benjamin worked in the fields along with his people. > What makes LDS writers think they don't need to do the same? At last, the crux of the matter. And the answer to the question that still has not been asked. Does a writer labor to produce? Apparently not, and so is unworthy of her hire. scott - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 16:40:55 -0700 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Talent Search: Actor for Joseph Smith D. Michael Martindale wrote: > > > Talent Search for Principle Actor to portray the Prophet > > Joseph Smith > > > The actor chosen to portray this role must be of high moral > > character in his personal life as well as on screen. > > "In his personal life" I understand, but "on screen" absolutely baffles > me. How is the actor going to lead an immoral life on screen? At least > without the director and editor being in cahoots with him. This is because the actor who portrayed Joseph Smith in "Legacy," they later learned, had been a porn star. Needless to say, that made them a little sensitive about this issue. Richard Hopkins - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 17:12:47 -0600 From: "Ethan Skarstedt" Subject: RE: [AML] Frankness in Mormon Writing D. Michael Martindale said: "Let's not hide from it, leaving all references to and images of sex to the world, thereby losing by default. I say, bring on the sex!" Hallelujah! Losing by default. That's exactly what it will come to. Well, said. There is a truth in my collection of truths (gathered like driftwood over the few short years of my life) that I summarize as "good intelligence makes for good decisions" It's a simple concept. If a person is presented with good/true information surrounding a decision they must make, it is within their power to make a "good" decision. Or, put another way, they will be able to predict with a reasonable amount of accuracy the consequences of their decision. Their decision will be informed. On the other hand when a person is given faulty, skewed, incomplete or even deliberately misleading information they are no longer able to make "good" decisions. They will, more times than not, be grotesquely surprised by the consequences of their actions. At the moment, the world we live in, the culture at large, whatever you want to call it, is handing out skewed information surrounding sex. (along with a thousand other things we all could name) I remember a poster in my brother's high-school health class. It was a picture of an unrolled condom with the legend "When you give the gift of love, make sure it's properly wrapped." Neither the health teacher or any of the school's administration that my father talked to saw anything wrong with it. They were, in fact, mystified by his objection. One of the greatest things literature has done for me in my life is present me with information and ideas that differed greatly from each other and from what I heard in school, at work, in church and in my home. I learned to separate the tripe from the truffles, to understand what was opinion and what was objective, to separate fact from fiction, and niftiest of all, to _glean_ fact from fiction. As an author I try to write truthfully even when I'm turning out sword and sorcery fantasy. (if that makes sense to anyone. _I_ know what I mean) I think there is a great good to be done in the Mormon culture through literature that presents the widest possible range of information, philosophy, opinion, doctrine, science etc... Literature is a great way of disseminating good intelligence, especially if it's entertaining. Sex is only the beginning. - -Ethan Skarstedt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 22:35:10 -0500 From: "Rose Green" Subject: Re: [AML] Environmental Questionnaire >18. Other than in national parks, are there any wild bear in the >continental >USA? > >Lots of black bear in the Pacific Northwest. Also in the Sierras. I don't >know about the East. Yes, there are (if you take "east" to mean "east of Utah"). They are in Arkansas--every so often we'd hear about them coming into town and wandering around in subdivisions when I lived there. Rose Green _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 22:49:35 -0500 From: lajackson@juno.com Subject: [AML] Re: Money and Art Kathy Tyner: Let me assure Thom, Larry and anyone else wondering if we at The Sugarbeet are hoping we'll eventually be making a living off this enterprise-not hardly. _______________ Not to worry, and I didn't mean to hit a sensitive note. I was just having a little fun at your expense (ooh, there's that awful word again), because I'm jealous and not good enough to write for the Beet myself. So you and Todd and all the others keep writing. And I'll lighten up a little. 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: Mon, 06 May 2002 20:01:55 -0500 From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Environmental Questionnaire At 11:36 PM 5/3/02, Alan Mitchell wrote: > > 5. How long has the earth's temperature begun to gradually rise? > About 10,000 years. Since the last ice age. What about the Little Ice Age, and the period of warmth that preceded it? - -- Ronn! :) Ronn Blankenship Instructor of Astronomy/Planetary Science University of Montevallo Montevallo, AL Disclaimer: Unless specifically stated otherwise, any opinions contained herein are the personal opinions of the author and do not represent the official position of the University of Montevallo. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 00:19:44 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Money and Art lajackson@juno.com wrote: > > We "pay" them in exposure to 40,000 readers and > > publicity in the SL TRib and newspapers all over the > > country. That's better than a few bucks, don't you think? > > > > I guess we pay people in fame. It was lucky fame, but > > fame of a kind nonetheless. > Ha, ha. Ho, ho. Hee, hee. Yes, I get it now. > Hoo, hoo, wheee . . . > > And where do I put that on my little bank deposit slip > so I will be able to pay the mortgage on the 1st? As one of those who is getting paid in the exposure currency, I don't think it's anything to ha-ha-ho-ho-hee-hee at. Like the ultimate goal of romance is sex (unless you're a woman), the ultimate goal of an aspiring professional writer is to collect some cash for it. But there's such a thing as dues-paying. Thom has lamented about getting cash for his work because he's been paying dues for a long time now and figure his break is due. But not all of us are in that position. Some of us are delighted with the exposure. - -- 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, 7 May 2002 07:40:15 -0600 From: "Peter E. Chamberlain" Subject: RE: [AML] Environmental Questionnaire Just as an addition to the question about wild bears. Upstate New York, specifically the Adirondack Park has a large black bear population. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 08:17:29 -0700 From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Frankness in Mormon Writing May I just say, Michael, beautifully expressed. Thank you for giving voice to the feelings I've had over the years. Kim Madsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 13:53:45 -0400 From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] Environmental Questionnaire Alan Rex Mitchell wrote: >18. Other than in national parks, are there any wild bear in the continental >USA? >Lots of black bear in the Pacific Northwest. Also in the Sierras. I don't >know about the East. There are black bears here in upstate NY. I'm pretty sure they range all over the US. I know they're as far south as the Carolinas and as far west as Arkansas. After that, well, they're no longer in the east. Back around Thanksgiving, a colleague was driving up from Pennsylvania at night and there was some confusion with the cars ahead of him. He slowed down, but hit a very dazed black bear. It had already been hit by three cars. It died and everyone was upset. Especially her cub. They are protected and their population is getting larger. Tony Markham - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 15:12:42 -0500 From: "Todd Petersen" (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Re: Money and Art Larry was laughing all over the place about getting paid in exposure, and my response is: get a day job. To even think that one could reasonably pay the rent writing is about as absurd a notion as any. Sure it happens--many on this list know people who make money--but I know for a fact that Dean Hughes, for example, doesn't make much. But people also win the lottery or are born into money or have a meteorite smash into their house. What most publications can pay for short fiction and poetry is a pittance, not enough for a good date for a poem, and maybe enough for a couple of books for a story. Mostly you just get paid in copies and a line for your resume or something to go on your cover letters to agents/editors. Just look through the Writer's Market and you'll see. In my line of work (teaching) the fame and notoriety is much more valuable than any cash payment. Also there is a certain amount of value in exposure in that agents and editors are more likely to look at you if you have this exposure than if you don't. That is if you're trying to publish beyond the pulp market So, having an naive sense of payment and value could make one laugh, but in the long run, exposure is worth more than money in many ways. Some writers, however, do put the money before all else, they want to write and cash out like people in the tech industry often do, but most good literature doesn't get produced under those terms. The writing I like and respect isn't done, in general for the money, even when some money comes along. It's done for its own sake. Even a 30,000 dollar advance for a novel isn't much if you spread it out across the total working time. Sure it would be nice to get money, but (now I'm really laughing) don't hold your breath, especially if you're an LDS writer. Better to forget about the cash, in my opinion (hallelujah if it comes; no biggie if it doesn't) and get to work. Maybe the root of this discussion is planted in this notion that getting paid is a pretty good indication that what one is doing is legitimate. We have an unpaid clergy, who seem pretty dedicated. Would they be better dedicated if they got a little scratch, like the rest of the Protestant world? Is that a fair comparison? - -- Todd - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #703 ******************************