From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #769 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 Friday, July 12 2002 Volume 01 : Number 769 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:17:39 -0700 From: Robert Slaven Subject: Re: [AML] LUND, _The Freedom Factor_ (Review) Scott raises some interesting points in his review that I'd like to examine. And Scott, perhaps I'll be able to improve your luck by the end of it.... %-) > Second, the obviously Soviet-style socialism he offers as the replacement in > this alternate America reads just a little too much like a right-wing > political tract for my tastes. Rather than creating a new and unique > alternate history that mixed some good in with a lot of bad in a partially > implemented American Dream, he chose to simply appropriate the Ghost of > Communists Past--ignoring all the other successful governmental types that > have been implemented in the last several hundred years. Again, the premise > appears to have been all or nothing, and I just had a hard time with that. I am of the firm belief that the 'whore of Babylon' in Revelation is unfettered capitalism. Communism per se is dead. Totalitarianism is alive and well, from the tinpots like Mugabe to the bigwigs as in China to the growing 'rule by dollar' exerted by large (generally American) corporations. The Chinese, IMHO, aren't so much 'communist' as they are 'Confucianist oligarchical rulers who happen to have Communist roots'. Mugabe used to call himself a Marxist, but that was only because the Soviets were willing to help him out against Ian Smith when no-one else was. So using Communism as 'the devil' wears badly on me. (Granted, Lund wrote this in 1987, but still.... Even allowing for the fact that Ezra Taft Benson wrote 'The Red Carpet' in the 1950's, I find it terribly embarrassing to read. It reminds me of much anti-Mormon literature in its half-truths, wild extrapolations, and just plain irrational ranting. But I digress....) > The recurring political story in this novel is so aggressively right-wing > that it begs a question--is this emphasis of the political right a core > element of Mormon doctrine, or is it an artifact of the heavy Utah influence > on Mormon literature? Because I can't recall a single Mormon political > thriller that doesn't proclaim an aggressively right-wing agenda--along with > its black-helicopters/despotic-overlord as the only apparent alternative to > that agenda. AFAIK, most US Mormons are very, very right-wing. Much of that, of course, is tied in with the desire to avoid the 'pro-abortion/pro-gay/pro-immorality' crowd, as many of them would put it. Much of that is also tied in to, as Scott points out, the deification of the Constitution. I think the 'Constitution inspired by God' thing doesn't mean that 'the Constitution is inerrant', the way Baptists would refer to the Bible. I think it just means that God inspired those men to put down on paper, for the first time in history, a set of rules for a country that got away from the 'divine right of kings' crap and actually recognised the *people* as the sovereign force of the country. That idea has since been copied all around the world, with varying degrees of success. (Read some of the old USSR constitutions some time; beautiful language, impressive documents, but, of course, not particularly well-implemented....) As well, a nation such as that was likely the only place where someone like Joseph Smith would go and pray about which church was right. (Fancy a French farmboy doing the same thing anytime in the 19th century....) Anyhow, most US Mormons, when they see political enemies, see Communists, 'big government' types, pro-choice etc. types, and (lately) anyone with a turban and/or who speaks Arabic. Unlike myself, they don't see the right itself as a potential threat. > What I'm concerned about is the rest of us. Where are the other kinds of > stories? Where's the political dialog through literature that dares to > question American Jingoism as a gospel principle? Where are the stories of > how Mormon culture sometimes comes into conflict with American political > culture? It does happen, doesn't it? > > Is there another political stance in Mormon culture? I have to wonder, > because I can't recall seeing it presented in literature. I hope it's > because we haven't written those stories, not because the Mormon publishing > establishment refuses to publish those other visions. I'm only getting into writing just now, having churned out three SF stories last month and currently peddling them. (Well, one's at the Writers of the Future contest, one got a very nice rejection slip from F&SF and is now at Asimov's, and the third is waiting for some lyrics permissions from Elton John.) I'm now on the lookout for more story ideas, perhaps leading to a novel or two (I see one of my short stories leading to a novel which conflates the sex trade with diamond smuggling in the NWT, all tied together by the Russian mafia, for example.) And one vague story idea I have would interest you. It's triggered partly by Orson Scott Card's story 'West', found in _Folk of the Fringe_. At the beginning, a few Mormon refugees are fleeing Greensboro NC (Card's hometown for the last two decades) after most of the white Mormons in town have been massacred by the Baptists. I see Mormons growing in number and power, both in the US and elsewhere. (Where did I see a story saying LDS were way over-represented -- more than their less-than-2% of the population -- in places like Congress and big business?) I then see a backlash; as the world continues to go to hell in a handcart (not just in the traditional 'family/moral' issues that we all get on about, but also with stuff like Enron/Tyco/Worldcom et al.), some Mormons will get caught up in it. (I especially worry about business types who equate wealth with righteousness.) Others will try to stand true, and get flak for it. The 'gathering to Zion' will be more an issue of faithful Mormons trying to huddle together to minimise the persecutions, and eventually gravitating together in Utah and/or Missouri. I see most non-Mormons not noticing anything. They'll just keep right on watching MTV, shopping at Wal-Mart, and so on, and when the medical chips that we'll all have in 20 years are upgraded to allow the storage of credit information on them, they'll all just shrug and be glad they don't have to carry around little plastic cards anymore. I see 'traditional right-wing' Mormons being very, very, *very* confused by everything. I see them in favour of 'the war on terrorism', until the continuing restrictions on civil liberties make them wake up to realise what's happened. I see some Mormon Timothy McVeighs. I see Mormons gathering into communities trying to implement the United Order and the materialistic ones having a real hard time with the idea of signing *everything* over to the bishop, even if one does get to keep it all as a stewardship. I see the few Mormons with a more balanced -- or even more socialist -- world view being among the only ones who can make some sense of it all. I see Mormons slowly becoming more and more anti-capitalist, anti-corporatist. I see the great battle as being between the forces of corporate oligarchy and the Mormon forces of charity/sharing and individualism. > Maybe a review isn't the place to rabble-rouse or question the > political/social/artistic vision that Mormons present through literature. > Then again, after reading a book like _The Freedom Factor_ I can't help but > think about the relationship between Mormon doctrine and political theory > and social vision. Because literature does raise these questions--or at > least it should. > > As much as I want to resist the claim that Mormons are a homogeneous lot, > the lack of other political (or social, economic, or environmental) visions > in our literature certainly seems to beg the issue. And isn't that part of > what a review allows? If I'm lucky, someone will write a book and prove that > there is more than one Mormon vision on politics, and that's the best a > reviewer can hope for. > > If I'm lucky... > Scott, for you, I'll do my best. Now, let's see if I can get one of them there socialistic Canada Council grants, and I'll be off. %-) Robert ********************************************************************** Robert & Linn-Marie Slaven www.robertslaven.ca ...with Stuart, Rebecca, Mariann, Kristina, Elizabeth, and Robin too 'Man is that he might have joy--not guilt trips.' (Russell M. Nelson) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 21:26:39 -0400 From: "Richard Johnson" Subject: [AML] Replies This is a painful time for me. I have saved more messages from the list in the past 24 hours than any time in recent memory. I have learned much. The Laird Jim dealt with art in a way that resonated with me intensely. I have responded to Thom with occasional vitriol, usually eliminated by the moderator, but I respond to his message re: the Nauvoo Theatrical Society with nothing but envy, joy, wonder, I loved the exposition on Black. I wish I could have been as clear with the administration at GA. Southern the last time they (mimimally) refurbished our auditorium/theatre and it might not have been painted in reflective institutional very light beige. You spurred all kinds of replies. I have moved to DSL at my house and still haven't figured out how to get Eudora to reply to the list (I get violent error messages). Thank you all any hoo. I had to go to all kinds of permutations in Outlook to just send a new message. Richard Johnson Richard B. Johnson (djdick@PuppenRich.com) Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important. http://www.PuppenRich.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 21:25:34 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Mormon Utopias You *had* to know I'd respond on this one :). - ---Original Message From: Scott Parkin > > I know this may be a mild abuse of List guidelines, but would > you be willing to offer a more detailed list of the reasons > why capitalism/socialism allegedly denies/reflects gospel > truth as we know it? I ask, because I want to hear the > reasonings behind both mindsets so that I can address them to > some degree in my proposed near-future, pre-Millenial, > pseudo-utopic, speculative novel. I'll bite. I don't think either capitalism *or* socialism bears much resemblance to the way things will work in the millennium. But that's just me. Socialism denies too much agency and capitalism allows too much conflict and duplication of effort. Of the two, I think that capitalism, assuming a foundation of freedom and the rule of law, is more useful for the world as it is right now. But that's in the same way that a representative democracy is the most useful for the world as it is now--i.e. damage control for a world in a fallen state. Neither is the way things will actually work once we're ruled by God. I once spent a lot of time considering how goods and services would be allocated in the millennium. I was drawn to capitalism because it is relatively efficient because prices are such an excellent way to communicate relative need. But I kept finding that the few scriptures about millennial society pretty much all talk about how buying things isn't how it works. Eventually, I found a better way that would work with millennial-type people. The better model for the millennial distribution of goods is to take the way the church is structured as a model--decisive power is put on the lowest level possible (bishops) with broad outlines and communication flowing from a central source. Given that technology doesn't disappear for the millennium, we have excellent capabilities to implement such a system for goods and services if we can safely make the assumption that fraud will be pretty rare. Needs can be communicated, work can be distributed, and each individual can volunteer for work that needs doing with the local needs filled first and left-over capability given to support larger or more aggregated requirements. This gives a lot of power to Bishops, but then, spiritually speaking, they already have that. Technology allows us to keep the whole structure relatively flat and the lack of central planning avoids the mess that is socialism (or communism)--i.e. where decisions are made centrally and communicated from on high with little first-hand knowledge of life in the trenches. The trick is to keep the bottom level groups small (100 to 300 people) and make sure that communication is adequately facilitated so that large projects can be undertaken without a lot of duplication of effort. > One of the reasons I ask is that it seems to me that economic > systems have little or no bearing on moral agency. The > ability to choose among many brands of canned peas (or not) > seems far less important a gospel question than what > moral/social good is enabled with that can of peas. That > choice seems to me to be independent of the economic system > that made the peas available to consumers. Well, with the problem that restrictive economies tend to restrict other freedoms as well. Systems that centralize a lot of power are easier to abuse and can change direction very quickly--meaning that you can't very well trust the way things are because a small shift of power can have wide-ranging shifts in policy. > Over the years, the body of the Church has participated in > any number of economic experiments, including the socialized > United Order and the aggressively capitalistic modern > American free market economy--with little or no impact on the > fundamental doctrines and ordinances. Religion and economics > address different fundamental questions. Or so it seems to me. Very true. And if you can keep them separated then the economic parts don't much matter. The trick is to keep them separated. A central power means that any group (including religious groups) can exert a lot of control if only they can influence the central power. As our ancestors found in Europe when the national church was chosen by the king. And as anyone in Saudi Arabia today finds if they try to be anything except Muslim. > That's certainly how it's been portrayed in the vast majority > of Mormon fiction--the Saints go off to their own separate > place, close the doors, and exist fully independent of the > rest of the world. Or at least they try. > > Is that gated community concept of the Mormon utopia a > reflection Mormon doctrine? It certainly reflects our > previous experiments, but that was in an age of the > subsistence farm where one could close the gates; I'm not > sure it would be possible to do that now without colossal > technological and social regression, and I see few reasons to try. > > Yet we regularly see Mormon apocalyptic fiction that forces > Mormons into exactly that--a social/economic/political > separation from the rest of society, or at least from a > corrupt American society (oddly we rarely see apocalyptic > stories set outside of the U.S.). But doesn't this violate > the whole idea of building Zion wherever we are? > > And yes, I'm trying to write a pre-apocalyptic, pre-Millennial > novel that postulate some level of Mormon social or economic > or political pseudo-utopia. While I have no intention of > getting apocalyptic in my story, that certainly is a > direction I could go if I chose. One of the things I find interesting about having a millennial government that operates similar to how the church does now, is that it points out that we probably *could* practice something of an LDS utopia and still remain *in* society. One of the things that Brigham Young was *very* good at was to recognize the power of people pulling together. Group negotiations and group effort are very powerful. He had an innate grasp of co-op power. Given modern communication techniques, we could unify our efforts in interesting ways right now. Group insurance? Group purchases of supplies and collective distribution along already proven channels. Intriguing possibilities there. This system has the appeal that the scriptures that *seem* to have us isolating ourselves *can* be interpreted to mean that we work together wherever we are. We cooperate economically and none can stand against us. You can see a glimmer of that happening with the Perpetual Education Fund. It wouldn't be too hard to map a line from that to other collective action that doesn't require us to band together physically. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 18:30:02 -0600 From: David Hansen Subject: [AML] Faith-Building Literature? A novel to help me believe in God? At least that's what the inside cover said. I picked up the book "Life of Pi" by Yann Martel in the bookstore and ended up buying it because of the inside cover leaf. It read, "This is a novel of such rare and wondrous storytelling that it may, as one character claims, make you believe in God." Being the curious sort, and the book not seeming overtly didactic, I thought I'd give it a try. I was not disappointed. After finishing in less than 24 hours (yes, it's one of those hard to put down books), I would unequivically recommend this book to anyone. Not only is it well written, but fast paced and thrilling. (It doesn't even contain many of the evils some complain of language and sex - there is some violence however.) The story concerns Piscine Molitor Patel or "Pi", a young Indian (India, not Native American) boy who was born a Hindu, and then simultaneously becomes a Christian and a Muslim. His father runs a zoo in India, and in an effort to make a better life, determines to sell the zoo and move to Canada. On the journey to the Americas with the animals, the boat sinks and Pi is saved inside a lifeboat with four of the animals - a wounded zebra, a hyena, an orangatang, and a 450 pound bengal tiger named Richard Parker. The story concerns his story of survival for 227 days at sea, and his eventual rescue in Mexico. (it's not any mystery at the beginning of the book that he's rescued.) The ending has kept my wife and I thinking for several days about what we really believe about this story. But, in reflecting back, I don't know if at the end of the book it really helped me to increase my faith in God. Since then, I've thought - does any literature really help me to believe in God? Perhaps the closest I can come in my mind to faith building literature is Hugo's Les Miserables. But faith in Hugo comes more when he's being irreligious than religious. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is a great story, but unconvincing as truth by itself. Are there any overtly LDS books or stories, outside of scripture, that have helped increase your faith in God? (Do they have to be true to increase faith - like the pioneer stories we hear so often?) Dave Hansen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 14:23:54 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Satan Figures I can't accept that Satan didn't "get" the plan of salvation. He was one of the brightest spirits among us--his name Lucifer verifies that. He got it just fine, thank you. I think you need to look in darker places to find a motivation for him. To become a son of perdition, one has to "get" the plan of salvation to a high degree, then deliberately choose to reject it and fight against it. Surely the lord of the sons of perdition didn't come by that position through a lesser process of not "getting" it. - -- 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: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 14:52:56 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] S.L. Newspaper Wars Christopher Bigelow wrote: > > If anyone's concerned about the Salt Lake newspaper situation, here's an > interesting Trib editorial with a call to action at the end. This situation > makes me both mad and scared. I would hate to see us lose the Trib as a > fully independent voice. I think this whole situation is overblown. Once in a Tribune article, the reporter listed several possible actions the Trib managers could take if they lost in court and the Deseret News took over. One of those actions was that the Trib managers could go start another paper. They should keep trying to win in court. But if they lose, this would be a fairly straightforward alternative. And considering the feedback from many Trib readers over this whole thing, I suspect the new paper would get a lot of subscriptions. This whole mess shows the shortsightedness of certain Mormon thought processes. The Deseret News is supposedly trying to get control of the Trib to censor out stories critical of the church. Yet all the Trib managers have to do is go start another paper. Then the News has absolutely no influence in how that paper runs. The whole thing will have been a waste of time. - -- 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: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:12:05 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Unbiased Presentation "Richard C. Russell" wrote: > I don't believe it is possible to be unbiased or unslanted in any recreation > or retelling of any account. It might be desirable (though I can't see why) > but it wouldn't be interesting and interest is the lifeblood of > storytelling. We don't have to agree with the other viewpoint but it might > change and challenge us. Where it gives us a new insight, it is precious. > That is good storytelling. Since when is news reporting equivalent to storytelling? - -- 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: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:44:28 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Other Side of Heaven_ (Review) Moderator wrote: > > (If Michael strenuously > disagrees he can have Terry Jeffress not include this in the review archives > on the AML-List Web site, I guess...)] I've yet to strenuously disagree with having my words displayed for people to admire. - -- 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: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 17:36:59 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] DUTCHER, _Prophet_ (Status) There have been some rumors floating around that Richard Dutcher's next film project "Prophet" has run aground. I took it upon myself to verify them from a reliable source. "Prophet" has not been cancelled. In fact, the project's in better shape now than it ever was. There was a withdrawal of some funding for a while, but that's been restored and added to. In fact, the film has become a pretty substantial project and is expected to make a big splash. I was also made privy to some casting information, which I am not allowed to reveal. Just had to throw that in for a little ego trip. - -- 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: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 11:17:58 EDT From: Kimheuston@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Thoughts on Art and Literature "Almost all great art came about while there were more rules than grammar or punctuation." You might be interested in Frederick Jackson's book _The Culture of Hope_. It is a challenging but very rewarding read. Kimberley (Heuston) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 09:41:40 -0700 (PDT) From: William Morris Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Utopias - --- Scott Parkin wrote: > I know this may be a mild abuse of List guidelines, but would you be > willing > to offer a more detailed list of the reasons why capitalism/socialism > allegedly denies/reflects gospel truth as we know it? I ask, because I > want > to hear the reasonings behind both mindsets so that I can address them > to > some degree in my proposed near-future, pre-Millenial, pseudo-utopic, > speculative novel. > I make no claims to the validity of the (mis)characerizations that follow. I realize that those who feel strongly about either system (either in the positive or negative) can make good arguments to support their feelings about them. These are incredibly broad brush strokes meant to tease out the implications of theorizing about a concept (the Millennial reign) that we don't know much about. So here it goes: 1. The basic ideas of socialism are similar to the United Order and to accounts of Utopian societies in scripture, esp. the idea of having all things in common. There's no doubt that communism as it was practiced during the 20th century was an evil ideology, but communism never actually was put into practice and the redistribution of property and resources happened under threat of force. Capitalism creates greed and waste and poverty. When people are righteous enough to actually make a Utopian society work (i.e. live the law of consecration) it will resemble the ideal forms of socialism. This is what will happen at the Millennium. 2. Communism is one of the greatest evils ever created by man/Satan. It destroys free agency, supressess vital freedoms, wastes resources and creates lazy, mistrustful people. To even discuss the merits of communism is heretical because Church leaders have spoken out against it. Capitalism is the best economic system because it creates incentive to work and innovate. Products and ideas that aren't valuable don't survive. When the Millennium comes, the Church isn't going to force everyone to turn their property over to their bishops, but people will want to live the law of consecration so they will. It will be the ultimate expression of capitalism because it will represent what the people and thus the markets want. Just like the markets now are driven by what people need and want. Now you can temper both of the arguments and add nuance, acknowledge the problems with both systems. And some Mormons see clear distinctions between socialism and communism (and, many don't, in my experience). But what is above represents the visceral, emotional responses to the concepts. The emotions that arise when someone pushes that button. I think the specific gospel reasonings behind supporting either system are fairly obvious and probably most easily expressed in the negative. Communism suppresses free ageny; capitalism creates greed and too often violates the principle and practice of charity and love. But I don't think the key to this discussion revolves around the realtive merits of either system---you don't find many hard-core socialists in the Church. The key is in how you characterize the economic system that will be ushered in at the Millennium. Both sides tend to agree that the law of consecration will be lived and will work because of the righteousness of the people and because economic functions will center in the Church. Those who talk about socialism are viewing things from a broader historical and more abstract perspective. Since communism has been discredited as a viable system in practice, those who can see its merits must separate out the principles from the way it was implemented. Thus their arguments rest mainly on scriptural and doctrinal ground. Those who advocate the capitalist view also do so on abstract terms (esp. the free agency thing) but their arguments are also more grounded in immediate history and in the attitudes of Church leaders during the cold war. They refuse to abstract socialist principles from the way they were (mis)applied in the Soviet Union and China because to do so would be to condone/validate those regimes. This leads to cross-talk and mischaracterizations of the others position that range from the abstract to the historical to the emotional. > One of the reasons I ask is that it seems to me that economic systems > have > little or no bearing on moral agency. The ability to choose among many > brands of canned peas (or not) seems far less important a gospel > question > than what moral/social good is enabled with that can of peas. That > choice > seems to me to be independent of the economic system that made the peas > available to consumers. > Here you are critiquing capitalism because your example is based on consumer choice. In socialism, there is no such thing as consumer choice. It was interesting to go in to the government stores in Romania (where I served my mission) and find only one brand of everything. Of course, on a fundamental level you still could exercise some choices (color, type of fabric, pattern). I would be interesting in hearing how others link moral agency to economic systems. Do consumer choices aid, hinder, or have no affect on moral ones? > Over the years, the body of the Church has participated in any number of > economic experiments, including the socialized United Order and the > aggressively capitalistic modern American free market economy--with > little > or no impact on the fundamental doctrines and ordinances. Religion and > economics address different fundamental questions. Or so it seems to me. > I think this is a place where (and it looks like you are going to be doing this Scott) literature can really help us define and address these 'fundamental questions.' Right now we're caught in this idea that a combination of democracy and capitalism is the 'best possible system.' I don't think that's a bad place to be caught in, but it's also not completely unproblematic. If the doctrines don't change under different economic systems, then what changes is the way that the systems impact how doctrine is lived and religion is exercised. How do the stories of individual salvation change (what experiences cause growth/pain/hard choices) when the economic systems change? > Is that gated community concept of the Mormon utopia a reflection Mormon > doctrine? It certainly reflects our previous experiments, but that was > in an > age of the subsistence farm where one could close the gates; I'm not > sure it > would be possible to do that now without colossal technological and > social > regression, and I see few reasons to try. > It's not doctrine, but it's built into our scripture, our immediate history and our thinking of ourselves as an ethnos (a peculiar people). It's not the only way to conceive of a Mormon utopia, but it's easy for me to see why it would be the dominant one. > And yes, I'm trying to write a pre-apocalyptic, pre-Millenial novel that > postulate some level of Mormon social or economic or political > pseudo-utopia. While I have no intention of getting apocalyptic in my > story, > that certainly is a direction I could go if I chose. > I think this would be an awesome achievement. Do it. One of the things that disappointed me most about Orson Scott Card's post-apocalyptic Mormon society in _Folk of the Fringe_ is that it reverted to provincialism. This makes sense (duh! what else is going to happen after major destruction---there's no infrastructure for anything but a provincial society), but I'd like to see more cosmopolitan forms of Mormonism explored in literature. I myself am working on a short story that takes place in an America where there's been sort of an apocalypse (at least there's been major destruction to the nation's infrastructure and mass migration---the Church has moved to South America, in fact) but then a quick rebuild with new, slightly different and slightly more advanced technology laid over the previous infrastructure---kind of like the ancient cities that would build (or rebuild)on top of a previously destroyed one, using the old city walls as a foundation for new walls. ~~William Morris __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 13:20:27 -0500 From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Utopias On a theoretical basis, it would seem easier to institute a United Order-type institution under a free market system than under a socialist system--in part because the United Order is, in a sense, in competition with what a socialist government would be doing, in that it is attempting to coordinate the economic efforts of people. Such an effort could be seen as a threat to the government. On the other hand, we have antitrust legislation in this country which, it seems to me, could be interpreted as a barrier to widespread implementation of a United Order. That could be a lot of fun for the type of novel Scott's suggesting, set in a time when the United States *hasn't* completely deteriorated but the Saints are trying to live by some kind of United Order. Just imagine the lawsuits if the Saints tried to start living in economic agreement with each other! There are already plenty of anticompetition accusations around, as the whole Deseret News/SL Tribune dispute seems to attest. >From a practical perspective, if the Church (or its units in various areas) were trying to live the United Order, I could see some sharp negotiation with socialist countries that would allow the Saints to "do their thing" within the context of the types of guidelines the government was trying to establish. In other words, you could have a United Order that was part of a socialist system--not because the Church favored such a system, but as a practical way of doing something the Church leaders felt it was time to try to do. This could create some real internal conflict for Church members who feel that socialism is an inherently evil system because it denies freedom. I could see some very good conflicts arising out of this. I mentioned something above about individual Church units attempting to live the United Order. Rather than some broad centrally-driven movement, what I think would be fun to see is conditions of disruption (but not universal disaster) that led Church leaders to authorize leaders in local areas to set up United Orders as desired. Probably (given current Church organization) this would make most sense on a regional level (where welfare services are often coordinated), but I think it would be more fun if the actual decision-making were on a stake level (with coordination, perhaps, on a regional level). I'd love to see a fictional depiction of a stake presidency/high council/bishops' council struggling to decide whether it's better or worse for them to institute a United Order in the stake. Presenting the discussion at stake conference (or stake priesthood meeting) for a sustaining vote. And so forth and so on. Local bishops--*not* yet relieved of their full-time jobs--trying to implement the thing. (There would of course be guidelines from the Church, but assuming a wide variety of local circumstances necessiting decision-making at a local level, there would inevitably have to be a lot of room for adaptation at the local level.) Hey! Deicion-making and administration at the local level could be the federal government's price for allowing it to go forward without antitrust interference. And then you'd have some interesting conflicts as different United Orders had to *compete* with each other, in ways that seem very different from what the Lord had in mind for the system. Anyway. Sorry for getting carried away with my ideas... Jonathan Langford speaking for myself, not AML-List jlangfor@pressenter.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 13:43:41 -0700 From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Satan Figures Clark said: >It is interesting how good requires evil. It does -- most of the time. But it isn't always necessary, nor will it be. Take into account the City of Enoch. Enoch was able to teach and serve and thereby lead a people to a point of righteousness where Satan was essentially bound. They had become so refined and pure that they could only look on sin with abhorrence and turn from it without being tempted in the least bit. The evil no longer served a purpose in their lives. They'd grown far beyond needing any outside "spur" to do good or be good, to choose right and be righteous. This is also the place the Nephite's had grown to at various times in the Book of Mormon, and is where we as a people, a Zion people, need to grow to again if we are to be ready to meet Christ when he comes again. The Celestial Kingdom also has no need of evil. Evil was cast out, and no unclean thing can enter the kingdom of God and remain there. It is mind-boggling to me to think that if I make good choices here, I may get to live in a world and existence that does not require conflict to grow and progress. The motivation becomes love instead of the courseness of pain and fear. In fact, we are told with great certainty in every book of scripture we have that love is supposed to be our motivation even here and now, while still subject to the adversity inherent in this mortal existence. Love God, love thy neighbor, love thyself, love thine enemies. Lose ourselves in service to others so we can then find our true selves, and grow that spark of divinity into an inferno of light powerful enough to create universes and children. If this (and I have no doubt of it) is the destiny of man, if he so chooses, is it possible in the here and now to write a novel without a satan figure, whether that figure be oneself or any of the other three traditional adversaries that make a story a story, and make it compelling enough? If there will come a time when conflict will no longer be necessary for growth, what kind of literature will then be produced? Will fiction still be wanted? Needed? Will it have a place? What form can it possibly take? Just something I've often wondered. Kathy Fowkes - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #769 ******************************