From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #727 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 29 2002 Volume 01 : Number 727 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 09:09:40 -0600 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Baby Exhaustion On Fri, 24 May 2002 15:40:50 -0600, Kellene Adams wrote: >Now for my questions. This pure and deep and even desperate fatigue has >taken me by such surprise, yet when I talk to people, it seems very >universal. Just about every mother of several young children seems to >experience it. I have been trying to come up with a useful, interesting,= and >purchase-worthy book idea targeting young mothers that contained hints = and >tips for dealing with this season of their lives. I think it would be very useful. My youngest is almost 2 now, and I'm finally starting to be less bone-weary and less emotionally unstable. = But when she was an infant, I remember I used to complain about being so = tired all the time--and the UNIVERSAL response, from people who should have = known better, was essentially "Duh. Deal with it. What did you expect?" = Which is not exactly helpful. So I just lived through it--didn't do anything really useful for two years (and the two before that, and the two before that). (I *think* it has something to do with caring for both an infant and = older children--the tiredness, I mean. When you have a passel of toddler-aged children and up, it's still complicated, but not quite so physically wearying. But that's just my experience.) I think such a book would be useful not just for the hints it could = provide, but for putting this season of life into a broader context. Just saying "you'll get over it" is very discouraging to someone who is in the middle= of tending a lot of little kids as well as an infant--someone who cannot see that there IS an ending, only that the current moment is almost = unbearably difficult. But if you can say that while providing ways to cope until = the period of fatigue passes...I think the simple knowledge that it's not an abnormal feeling would be very comforting. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:07:40 -0700 From: "Susan Malmrose" Subject: Re: [AML] Attack of the Clones_ (Review) > First of all, to address Eric's proposition that Lucas has some > kind of racist element going, especially in the casting of a > polynesian/maori actor to play Jango Fett. I receive emails I haven't read all of this thread, so maybe this has been covered, but I have a question--Bobo Fett is a clone, right? Jango Fett had asked for a clone of himself that wasn't genetically altered in any way. Wasn't that supposed to be Bobo? As for the racial issue, maybe I'm just clueless about stuff like this and don't notice it--but I never once thought of Jango Fett and all the clones as being of a particular race or nationality. He was just a bounty hunter out to make some quick cash. Susan M - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:45:31 -0700 From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Changes in Usage Levi, your statement here raises a question. It concerns the word "till." Given that it is a contraction of the word "until," and given that I've seen it written "'til," when did the spelling "till" become acceptable? Thanks! At 09:24 PM 5/24/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Regarding all right versus alright: > >I teach Freshman English online. Alright is a non-word with me. I correct it >in my students' essays. > >I doubt that alright will ever become acceptable in formal English. I was >told fifty years ago in my Freshman English class that it would be only a >matter of a few years till ain't became a respectable word. This half >century later, it still isn't respectable. I think that is the way it will >be with alright. > >Levi Peterson >althlevip@msn.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 11:02:47 -0700 From: "Tait Family" Subject: Re: [AML] Baby Exhaustion Sharlee: >one thing I have found that both astounds and saddens me is that > too many older women have forgotten what those years were like. As one who > has just "passed through" (my youngest is now 4), I have vowed never to > forget. Our society does a deplorable job of offering support to young > mothers. I'd like to change that--at least in my own little family circle. Me: My friends and I used to bemoan the "older" women who would watch us wrestle with our small children during sacrament meeting and then come up afterwards and say something like, "Just enjoy your children while they are little. This time is so precious!" We would roll our eyes and wonder why those people who thought our children were so "precious" didn't offer to help us out! Now, however, I'm in the teenager business, and not to discourage anyone, but this stage brings an exhaustion all its own that makes those baby years glow in retrospect. I keep telling my friends with young children that the elementary school years are really the "golden age" of parenting, the respite you get between babies and teenagers so that you can decide you really do like your kids before they turn into teenagers. I'm desperately hoping that things get better when they become adults--but I'm also wondering if these creatures will ever become adults. Whatever is written and published about this subject needs to be handled with a lot of humor. Most of the time all we can do is laugh. And too many of us don't allow ourselves to do that. We take parenting (or, ourselves as parents) so seriously! I watch my counselors in primary, both of whom have small children, and I find myself wanting to repeat those same words of advice to them: lighten up! Just love your babies and don't take everything so seriously. You're not going to be a failure as a mother if your child can't recite the articles of faith before she can read! Nobody expects a three year-old to have perfect manners! My mother, who also had four children in five years, was never able to admit how difficult and miserable motherhood was. She was never able to admit that she hated us at the same time she loved us. I think, truly, that it broke her sanity. Dialogue on this subject could be a literal lifesaver. But it would need to be honest and unblinking, as well as humorous and optimistic. I am not sure a mainstream LDS publisher would be comfortable with the level of honesty I'm envisioning. Lisa Tait - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:29:35 -0700 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Fiction/Nonfiction Markets Cornerstone is currently not publishing. The situation is so far beyond "confusing" that I won't even attempt at this time to describe it or how I think it will come out. I recommend that you avoid passing or believing rumors about us at this time. The possibilities are mind-boggling. But the bottom line is simple, we are not publishing at this time, and will give you notice when that changes. In the meantime, I'm running an editing service with assistance in manuscript placement or self-publication, if you're interested in that. This is a wonderful set of questions. I look forward to some answers from those who represent these publishers on this list. Let me say that Cedar Fort has come up a notch from what they used to be in my opinion. They are well run, but the biggest improvement I've seen is in their cover designs. They say that their sales have increased 40% in the last year and that they are publishing something like 65 book per year. That's more new books than I personally can imagine an LDS publisher putting out each year, but more power to them. I haven't heard much from American Book lately, but would like to. They seem to be aimed at the general trade market, with good books, including LDS titles. I think that's a very good development and would like to hear how it's going. Richard Hopkins - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 11:01:45 -0600 From: Cathy Wilson Subject: Re: [AML] Baby Exhaustion It is very hard to write about this, I think. When you're in the middle of it, it's hard to emerge from the fog enough to be brilliant and witty. When you're done with it, you can recall it but not all of its detailled miserableness--at least I can't. It's like childbirth; you blank out some of the worst of it. I was so tired for over twenty years as I had my nine kids! Even now, with our youngest almost ten, sometimes I wake up after an uninterrupted night's sleep full of wonder and disbelief--I slept! We were at a Saturday evening stake conference session last year that was totally amazing. The stake presidency gave some kind, interesting talks on family life and then the stake president opened the session up for questions. Although it was a huge meeting, the way he handled the discussion was just like an intimate class. Finally one woman carrying an infant and clearly in the middle of baby exhaustion said, "I understand everything you've been saying about quality family time and all. But to be honest, at the end of the day, all I want to do is escape. I am so tired!" Instead of giving her platitudes, the stake president stopped thoughtfully and said nothing, and soon people in the audience were answering. They talked about visiting teachers who regularly came and stayed for several hours, at least once a week, so overloaded moms might nap or veg out in the park. They talked about dads who gave up evening after evening of TV or snoozing after work to give mom a break. Everyone agreed that this was a very real problem and that mothers deserved and required serious support through these years. I know I didn't have it when I was raising those multitudinous children. I used to range hopelessly through my head to figure out someone who could help me, but my mom was in California and I just couldn't figure out anyone to help. Perhaps in Zion someday we'll all be family enough to give moms of many little children the support they really need. Cathy Wilson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 11:34:59 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Update to the Nauvoo Theatrical Society - 2 Thanks for that interesting update on your theater work, Thom. It adds to a potential attendee's enthusiasm to know something about what's going on behind the scenes. I hope you'll put out your casting calls on this list. BTW, as you build your dang-what's-that-word-for-a-bunch-of-actors-who-work-together?, maybe you can slide some of this hard physical labor onto young, strong actors. Then you can have more time for your excellent writing. After all, at our backs we always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near. barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 11:53:38 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Money and Art Tracie Laulusa wrote: > I'm not sure comparative earnings are a good measure of whether or not we > should donate our time to a project. So his profession has the possibility > of higher hourly wage. All the more reason, some would say, for him NOT to > donate his time and services. There are other things that are just as > important as money. How about time. I'm sure that often he was giving this > service during his very limited personal time. After all, he already has a > full church work load with all his stake presidenting. The problem is not with comparative income as an indicator of righteousness, but comparative income as an indicator of free time. The doctor who makes so much more money has more freedom to take time off and donate both time and materials to good causes than the subsistence worker who can barely pay the bills on two jobs and an in-home business. The widow's mite was a substantial portion of her wealth and represented a generous offering. While I think Thom is trying to privilege artists above other professions and claim special exemption from charitable work (which I strenuously disagree with), I think he makes an excellent point about the relative respect that different professions receive. When I tell people that I write for a living, I get the most bemused looks, and I feel like they think my vocation to be somewhat less than honorable--and certainly less than productive. Of course I live in an area populated by a lot of steel and construction workers. Oddly, people seem to find plenty of value in the billboard salesman's job at the same time that they find my vocation so amusing. Over time that bemusement and dismissal starts to pile up, and it leaves some of us feeling undervalued because we choose to traffic in hopes and ideas rather than tangible products. Oddly, if I tell people that I'm a computer interface designer, a human factors engineer, or a Web developer, I don't get the same reaction. The thing that amuses me is that all three of those other professions are component parts of what it means to be a writer in the technology industry--and none of them develop tangible products. But call yourself a writer and people think it somehow cute. > I guess all I'm trying to say is that there is something to be said for > giving the widow's mite. And, as said before, each person's decision is > between themselves and God. There is a great deal to be said of giving the widow's mite. To give when one has little time or means to offer a gift is a true act of charity and real concern for the well-being of others. What I understood Thom to be frustrated with was that the ward seemed to be demanding a dollar from his widow's income, then treated it as if it were a mite from a doctor's income. They perceive his offering as of little or no value because (to paraphrase a former employer) "any housewife can write." So why value mere writing and direction--which we think anyone can do--when we can choose to admire gifts of skill that we don't think we can match? It seems like we're choosing to value one offering over another, when all offerings should be valued alike. You're absolutely right--the act of charity should be done because it's right, not because it's valued. Our offering is between ourselves and our god, and earthly appreciation is irrelevant in a true true act of charity. Still, when we see the doctor lionized for giving materials he has in plenty and spending time that he has more freedom to arrange, then ignore the playwright who gives his best with less free time and less discretionary income with a simple "but it was his calling," I do find that we treat the playwright a bit unfairly. We should all give our gifts freely and without regard to public notice. But we should also appreciate each gift that is given. It's up to God to sort out who gave more; for us it is required that we appreciate all gifts. I don't think we do that. At least not as often as we should. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 12:12:13 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] New Sugar Beet "Jesus wants me for a Sugar Beet" http://www.thesugarbeet.com/ Bat Boy Joins the Church Church Introduces Administrative Machines Utah Man Calls Jewish Neighbor "Gentile" Petitioners Want Old Testament Removed from the Standard Works Couple Finds Erin Brockovich "Really Good" Despite Its R Rating Convert Won't Beat Wife on Sundays Active Nuclear Cannon Discovered in Utah Church Building Male Impersonators Outed at Father-Son Activity New DNA Evidence Aids Splinter Group's Challenge of Joseph Smith Martyrdom Vacuum Created by LDS Chronicler's Call to the Seventy Plus NEW and favorite departments - ----- Send Sugar Beet news tips to chris@thesugarbeet.com. Not all submissions will be acknowledged. If you were forwarded this message and want to join the Sugar Beet update list, send your request with ADD in the subject header to chris@thesugarbeet.com. OPT OUT: To stop receiving Sugar Beet updates, reply to this message with REMOVE in the subject header. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 14:28:55 -0400 From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] Music Query Amy Chamberlain wrote: > Sorry, Tony, I can't help you here, but now I'm fascinated: what do you mean > by Windham Hill "suppressing" a CD? > > Amy Chamberlain > Amy (and all), I have no idea, but was quoting from a Darol Anger website: http://www.darolanger.com/cds.html A more complete quotation has been cut and pasted below: NOW ONLY AVAILABLE THROUGH AMAZON-Sales suppressed by Windham Hill. The hard-to find Amazon page. Darol and Mike's finest hour. Unforgettable melodies combined with innovative arrangements push the art of the string band to limits never before attained. Features fretless bass wizard Michael Manring. Includes the NPR favorite "Dolphins"... Sometimes I think I'm going nuts--I first heard this album years ago stuck in traffic in Worcester, Mass. The DJ was playing cut after cut and calling the album Chiaroscuro. I bought it almost immediately (it was that good) but none of the cuts on this CD matched the ones he was playing. I always just figured there had to be another album of the same title out there somewhere. But thanks to all who helped me track it down, esp Marny Parkin. I'm reconciled to never hearing this haunting music again. Tony Markham - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 13:13:08 -0600 From: "Mary Jane Jones" Subject: Re: [AML] Baby Exhaustion >>> adamszoo@sprintmail.com - 5/25/02 12:26 PM >>> >I did go to a yoga class last Saturday, for the=20 >first time, and it really, really helps. It *works.* I don't know how.=20 >Probably through that "governing vessel" stuff Paris was teaching us = all=20 >about. But how easy is it to get out of the house and do that, on a = regular=20 >basis? Or afford it? (The class I attended was a free trial run.) = Yoga,=20 >especially, is something that needs to be taught. You can't just read = a=20 >book and learn how. And it fits in with our gospel just fine. Just wanted to recommend a series of Yoga video tapes: I don't have children yet, so I can't speak from that experience, but I = can tell you that the yoga tapes I use work wonders for all my work and = family related stress. I like the Kathy Smith yoga collection. I found = the series at my local library, and they have really helped me. Her = approach is not at all intimidating or overly New Age. It's relaxing, and = a pretty decent work out as well. All in the privacy of my living room. = The beginning tape was for me a really good introduction to yoga--everythin= g was explained well (and slowly), and I didn't need any equipment. =20 Thank heaven for public libraries.... Mary Jane Ungrangsee - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 13:37:00 -0600 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Baby Exhaustion Great post from Sharlee, and another from Kellene: >This pure and deep and even desperate fatigue has >taken me by such surprise, yet when I talk to people, it seems very >universal. Just about every mother of several young children seems to >experience it. I have been trying to come up with a useful, interesting, = >and purchase-worthy book idea targeting young mothers that contained hints and >tips for dealing with this season of their lives. >Question 1: Do you think this topic has any merit? I know there's some = >stuff >out there. . .has the subject matter been dealt with thoroughly? Weighing in as a guy; when this was happening with my wife, I was working = two jobs putting myself through graduate school. I was never home, and = thus contributed mightily to my wife's depression and exhaustion, = something for which I've never quite forgiven myself. I'd very much like = to see this topic dealt with. It does seem to me that those years when = mothers are with small children tend also to be the years when they and/or = their husbands are working unreasonable hours in order to establish = themselves professionally. Which makes me wonder how anyone survives = their twenties. >Question 2: Would you focus it on an LDS market so you could include >gospel-related material (i.e., Relief Society, prayer, scriptures, etc.) = or >look toward a national market and keep it nonLDS specific (although you >could certainly still include prayer-like suggestion, yoga, meditation, >etc.) I'd like to see both. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 13:22:54 -0600 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] MOORE, _Lamb_ (Review) Christopher Moore: Lamb, The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood = Friend. New York: HarperCollins, 2002. $25.95 hardcover. A very Bad book. Couple weeks ago I was teaching Sunday School, that lesson on phylacteries,= you remember it? The lesson manual (which I generally loathe anyway) = wanted us to ask people what kind of stuff they had on the walls of their = houses, and to, like, put post-it notes on all of it, labeling it 'leads = me to God,' or 'leads me away from God.' I wasn't going to do that, = obviously, nor recommend it, but thought a general lesson on iconography = might be of some interest, and, as a sort of ice breaker, mentioned that = if you walked into my house the first thing you'd see would be all the = book cases crammed with books. And a sister in the ward (who I really = like, actually) said, "but you only have good books, right? You don't = have any bad books." Well, I was stunned/shocked/baffled/mystefied. It just congenitally = doesn't occur to me to think of books that way, as 'good' or 'bad.' Books = are all good, always; that's the way my knee jerks. I mean, okay, = logically, I do think some books are qualitatively better than others, and = by constructing that sort of continuum it must logically follow that some = would end up on the 'bad' end of the scale. But I don't respond to books = viscerally that way, as 'good' books or 'bad' books morally. Fundamentally= , I don't think bad books exist. (Uninteresting, poorly written books, = sure. Like, say, Sunday School manuals.) Which brings us to a book I just have to tell y'all about, Christopher = Moore's novel Lamb. Subtitled, "the Gospel according to Biff, Christ's = childhood pal." I don't think there's much doubt that this is exactly the = sort of book that my dear ward sister had in mind as a 'bad' book. My = wife kinda thinks so too. I thought it was terrifically interesting and = amusing, but I'm also wary of recommending it too highly.=20 Here goes. It's a purported fifth gospel, written by one Levi ben = Alphaeus, otherwise known as Biff. Basically, it focuses on AD 6-30 = (well, actually 0-24, since Jesus was probably born 6 BC), the years not = covered by Matthew Mark Luke and John. The story is told first person, = from Biff's perspective. The basic premise is this; the angel Raziel has = come to earth to resurrect Biff, bring him to a Hyatt Regency outside St. = Louis, and keeps tabs on him while he writes a fifth gospel. Angels, in = the world of this book, are exceeding powerful and exceptionally dense, = and Raziel is no exception; while Biff writes, Raziel spends his time = watching pro wrestling and soap operas on TV, both of which he thinks are = real. Biff, meanwhile, keeps sneaking off to the bathroom, ostensibly to = masturbate, but actually to read the Gideon New Testament he found in the = room. The passages in the novel in which Biff describes his interactions = with Raziel are very short, but also really funny little sketches = in-between the main narrative.=20 The main narrative, then. Well, it's about Jesus' childhood, adolescence = and early adult years. It helps that Biff consistently calls him Joshua; = that distances us a bit. And, well, how can I describe this book? It's a = demented funhouse of a book, clever and witty and profane. And it's also = a serious examination of the basic ideas of Christianity. Moore never met = a punch line he didn't like, and 'inappropriate' is really not a word in = his vocabulary. But his research is detailed and convincing, and his = ideas are fascinating. =20 Biff himself is an interesting character. He's profane, sex obsessed and = something of a buffoon. He's a smart aleck, a wiseacre, whose proudest = achievement is teaching the Son of God the concept of sarcasm. He's also = fiercely loyal to his friend, and has a great capacity for love, and even = for spirituality. He is, in other words, and intensely human character, = and we can see why Joshua loves him. Joshua loves everyone. He is incapable of lying. He is incapable of = violence, or hatred, or malice. He is a generous and tender hearted child = and a generous and kindhearted adult. What's remarkable about Moore's = achievement with this book is that Joshua does not seem remotely . . . = remote. He's also human. He knows he's the Son of God. He knows he's = supposed to be the Messiah. And he doesn't know how. Which quest drives = the book; Joshua and Biff searching the world for answers to the question: = how does one behave as Messiah. So how to find out? Well, through the three wise men. Joshua looks them = each up in turn. From Balthazar (who he finds in Afghanistan), he learns = the writings of Confucius and Lao Tzu and Sun Tzu. (He's also taught by = Balthazar's eight Chinese concubines, about which more later). After he's = learned what he can, he travels to Tibet, where he meets Gaspar, who has = become a Buddhist monk. There, he learns the fundamental precepts of = Buddhism, and learns that his role as Messiah will, in part, encompass the = role of bodhisattva, one who has achieved enlightenment, but who refuses = nirvana until all others preceed him there. Joshua and Biff also learn = judo and kung fu. (This, Moore admits in an endnote, is an anachronism; = Buddhism did not arrive in Tibet until 500 AD, and kung fu was invented = two hundred years after that. But Buddhism, of course, preceeded = Christianity, and if the historical Jesus traveled to India, he would = certainly have learned of it). Finally, Joshua travels to India, where he = meets Melchior, a Hindu adept, from whom he is introduced to the Bhagavad = Gita and the Upanishads. Biff, meanwhile, is far more interested in = learning all he can from the Kama Sutra. =20 What clearly interests Moore is the connection between Christ's teachings = in the New Testament and Eastern religion. In a very revealing afterward, = Moore admits that Jesus could have, and probably did formulate his = teachings based on nothing more than his own spiritual insight, the = teachings of rabbis, and the Torah. He just thinks that the idea of Jesus = traveling all around the East makes for a better story. I still found it = all most provocative. But then there's all the sex. Now, Biff's interest in matters sexual is = certainly no more than that of any adolescent boy. And while Biff does = get to know (in all senses of the word) Balthazar's eight Chinese = concubines, Joshua does not. There's also a love triangle in the story, = between Biff, Mary Magdalene and Joshua. Mary (known as Maggie in the = book), desperately loves Joshua. Biff loves Maggie. Maggie is also = married to a Pharisee (who she eventually leaves). Joshua, meanwhile, is = celibate throughout. But he's very interested in sex, and makes Biff tell = him all about it. He 'needs to know about sin.' (For what it's worth, = Maggie also gets resurrected, and she and Biff end up together). =20 All this is very uncomfortable, yet not altogether implausible. What was = adolescence like for Jesus? How did he deal with the inevitable changes = that come from maturation? And did he have a best friend, and if so, what = was he like? For the nice lady in my ward, long discussions of sexuality = in a novel about Christ would, I suspect, automatically vault it onto the = 'bad book' list. Biff is, shall we say, sexually active in this novel, = although there aren't really any graphic or pornographic descriptions of = any untoward activity. Well, apart from quite comic parodies of the Kama = Sutra. =20 Moore's Joshua never marries, and remains faithfully celibate. Jewish = boys, in that era, normally married at fourteen. Well, what are the = implications of all that, theologically, historically? As a Mormon, I'm = untroubled with the notion that Jesus was married. But I'm equally = untroubled by Moore's fictitious notion that he traveled broadly in search = of enlightenment, or that a study of Buddhism may have been part of his = education.=20 Final note: there's a ton of bad language in this novel, especially the F = word. Really, it's not used to offend; it's just a word people use, = including Joshua. If you think, as I do, that words are morally neutral = and that offensiveness is a matter of context, then the language in this = novel is fine. But if you get offended by harsh language, I'd avoid this = book. =20 Anyway, it's really funny, and very well written, and thought provoking, = and could easily be seen as amazingly blasphemous though I didn't find it = so at all. Frankly, my main reaction to it was to want to be nicer to = people, and to look for genuine opportunities to practice charity. I = loved this book. But to the lady in my ward, it's probably a great = example of a very very bad book. =20 Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 15:46:20 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] LDS Booksellers Convention Once again, the AML is making it possible for dues-paying members of the AML to attend the annual LDS Booksellers convention under the AML's LDSBA membership. The 200-booth tradeshow hours are: Wednesday, 8/14, 9:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. Thursday, 8/15, 9:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. Friday, 8/16, 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. If you are not a current AML member and wish to attend, it looks like it costs either $5 or $25 for the AML to register you as a sponsored guest (the order form is unclear--I will have to inquire if anyone falls under this category). In addition to admission to the convention, you have the option of the following: Booksellers school lunch, Tuesday, 8/13, Noon, $12.00 (The actual school is free with reservation, from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.) LDSBA banquet, Thursday, 8/15, 6:30 p.m., $30 (There is also an LDSBA annual meeting on Friday morning, 8/16, 9 - 10 a.m.) Also, we can get extra copies of the LDSBA's 4-volume directory for $70 in print or on CD-ROM. This lists all the LDS products and wholesalers, I believe. (The AML gets one copy with its annual membership, but I don't think we've ever actually used it.) The deadline for registration is July 12, so let's say our AML deadline will be June 30 (if you need to mail a payment for anything, it has to be in the AML's hands by then). To register, contact me directly at chris.bigelow@unicitynetwork.com. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 15:55:26 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Baby Exhaustion At 02:17 PM 5/25/02, you wrote: >. Currently I have three children, aged 5, 3, and six > > months. I have never been so emotionally, physically, spiritually, and > > intellectually exhausted in my life. I got great solace from Sharlee's > > observation that the season passes; I'd suspected it, but having someone > > confirm it was very heartening. This is one problem with the nuclear family. One young woman must deal with all of this endless child care, all on her own, with few opportunities to refresh her mind and spirit. In our mobile society, young couples often live far away from parents or other family members who might otherwise help. The other women in the community are equally exhausted. And the idealistic family image that is constantly presented in the LDS culture makes these unfortunate women feel that something is wrong with them when they get tired and discouraged and want to throw the screaming baby out the window and heave the vacuum cleaner after it. My youngest is 34 -- but I still remember those days when by bedtime I could say, "Those kids are still alive. I've done my job." Forty years ago, I was astonished by that song, "I'm so glad I'm not young any more." Now I get it. Barbara R. Hume Provo, Utah - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 16:30:31 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: [AML] _Buffy_ (TV Series) (was: Young Heroes) - ---Original Message From: R.W. Rasband > Then there's Buffy Summers, who was called to be the vampire > Slayer when she was only 15. She has of course saved the > world multiple times since > then:-) Two good evaluations of the recent astonishing > season finale can be found online: > > "Buffy's War" by Thomas Hibbs > http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-hibbs052402.asp > > > "Willow, Destroyer of Worlds" by Stephanie > Zacharek (one of the most perceptive writers about "Buffy") > http://www.salon.com/ent/tv/feature/2002/05/22/buffy/index.html I thought the first article (the Hibbs one) was pretty superficial. It missed a lot of the layering and dwelled too much on a judgement of season (and series) merit. He spent too much time (in an article obviously pressed for space) on pacing and issues of craft and seemed to me to miss entirely a lot of the layers present in the show. The final paragraph is a good example of his general obtuseness where he attempts to sum up the concepts of good and evil in "Buffy". To me, one of the greatest strengths of the show is its insistence on avoiding too facile categorizations--most particularly categorization of good and evil. One of the reasons that I love "Buffy" is because of the ambiguity and complexity given the issues of good and evil--and that it can examine/depict those complexities without descending into the too-easy relativism that denies both good and evil their power. The second article is much more powerful and I think much closer the mark. Of course, it's at least three times as long as the first, but even Ms. Zacharek's summaries are more concise and accurate than Hibbs'. It's obvious to me that Zacharek not only watches the show, but that she is engaged in it on the profound levels it explores. I hope that isn't just a reflection of how I agree with Zacharek and disagree with Hibbs. I try not to be so simple as to label things I agree with as profound and/or denigrate those I disagree with. The truth is, in the middle of this season, I might have agreed more with Hibbs, particularly with regards to season pacing. However, subsequent episodes revised my opinion by showing the deeper meanings behind the actions I considered too facile and manipulative. I think that one of the great strengths of the show is how it has meaning and depth that continues to expand and contract over time--the way people might actually expand and contract given the experiences they endure. The characters have weaknesses that come out of their character--not out of the need of the writers at that moment to have a hook for their plot. And while actions look unjustified and too surface (like Zander leaving Anya at the altar), there *is* a consistent motivation and the resulting stories won't just explain those actions but will explore their deeper meanings and motivations and make the characters that much more understandable and give them the opportunity to make choices that will strengthen or weaken them in the ways commiserate with their choices. And that's what I really like about "Buffy". Choices have weight. Decisions come out of the depths of the characters and consequences are realistic, messy, and bear the weight of reality as I understand it. And the consequences have weight, too, creating chances for growth, reward, condemnation, forgiveness, redemption, and damnation. I'm excited for the next season because I can't wait to see what will happen with Spike. Spike has been the heartthrob of the internet "fan" base for years now, and this whole chip-in-the-head thing has been interesting (particularly if you relate it to Gerald Lund's "The Alliance"). The chip has shown how Spike is driven mainly by the chaotic impulse to rumble--to be a renowned warrior in direct opposition to the sensitive sap he was in mortal life. So with the chip in his head, Spike looks for a way to satisfy his need to fight and thus *joins* Buffy and the Scoobs because the chip makes it so he can only fight bad guys (defined as non-humans--i.e. demons, vampires, etc.). Contrast this to how, say, Angel would have reacted had he been "chipped". Anyone who saw the evil Angel episodes knows that nothing as sissy as a chip in his head would have stopped *him* from destroying Buffy anyway. Angel was motivated by "pure" evil and he was perfectly happy to manipulate from behind the scenes and tear their lives apart thread by subtle thread. His urge to destroy was spiritual and complete whereas Spike's tends to be purely physical. So what is going to happen now that Spike has his soul back? I'm not entirely certain that Spike didn't go to the evil department store demon-thing in *order* to get his soul back. I had the last two episodes taped and, while he certainly bitched about the chip, everything said could as easily have been him *requesting* to get his soul back. Buffy getting "everything she deserves" could as easily be him deliberately requesting his soul so that he can be tormented as *he* deserves--so that he can become the man *she* deserves. But I could be wrong. And with Joss Whedon at the helm of "Buffy", I'm just as happy if I am. Melissa mentioned to me before the season finale that she could see the show going "either way". By which, she meant that Willow might stay evil or might be redeemed. The strength of the show is that it *could* have gone either way. And we couldn't tell which way it would go. And yet, we were *sure* that whichever way Joss Whedon chose to take it, we would be content with it. We have that much confidence in his skill. We know that had Willow stayed evil, she would have done so based on reasons that made sense and suffered consequences that made sense. And, even more important, we knew that if she were redeemed, she would be redeemed for reasons that made sense and *suffered* *consequences* that made sense. And it turns out that our trust was justified. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #727 ******************************