From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #889 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 Monday, November 11 2002 Volume 01 : Number 889 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 23:09:57 -0800 From: JLTyner Subject: [AML] New Age Mormons? (was: Epiphanies) Paris has some profound insights into all this. I've learned a lot from him. (And don't let him bull you about being menacing, it's all a front-he's a teddy bear). I'm newer to the subject, but I have found constant parallels with these philosophies to LDS theology and have found great joy and comfort in it. Does that make us "New Age Mormons"? There was a fantastic panel on that very subject at the Sunstone Symposium last August. Carol Lynn Pearson was one of the panelists along with Dan Wotherspoon of Sunstone magazine. You might want to dial up their website and get the audio tape of the session, it was enlightening. As far as a good book goes, I highly recommend "Wheels of Light" by Rosalyn Bruyere. There are several chapters on the Kundalini and it's rise or awakening and it functions to our overall being mentally, spiritually, physically. Especially good are the breathing exercises for energy and quieting one's mind. Kundalini relates to the first or root chakra located at the base of the spine or the peritonium area and deals with things like survival, propagation of the race and oneself, and tactile sensation. Another good book is: "Dahnhak, The Perfect Way To Health" by Seung-Heun Lee. Excellent breathing, energy, and exercise techniques along with unique philosophy. Also good instruction on meridians, pressure points and visualization methods. I've been doing this practice for about seven months and am amazed the difference its made for the better in my overall health. Pres Hinckley did say this last Conference that Latter-day Saints don't meditate enough. I'm not sure if he had these techniques in mind, but they help you learn "to be still" and get the chatter out of your mind and that can only help if one wishes to use these things to contemplate Gospel truths. Pres. Joseph F. Smith's vision comes to mind here. As far as the Mormon Lit connection, other than the Sunstone Panel, I'm not sure there's too much written on Mormons and this topic as of the present. I've been thinking of something entitled: "Musings of a New Age Mormon" or "Enlightenment and Chocolate Chip Cookies" about my experiences with all this. Maybe even a piece on using Astral Projection to do Visiting Teaching for The Sugarbeet. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 01:37:44 -0700 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] LDS Film And Its Critics Article I started reading this article but when I got to this sentence, "For starters, if you get to the heart of Mormon culture, we are sentimental." I had to stop. Merrill was apparently offering this as a reason why Lee Benson's savage review of Charly was too harsh. And, while I agree the statement is true, I don't agree that it is a good thing. Yes, our culture is sentimental but our religion (the last I checked the official books at least) preaches that the glory of God is intelligence, not sentimentality. As far as I'm concerned, sentimentality is a childish version of real emotion. It is counterfeit emotion. Sentimentality is easily manipulable (when little Emily sings "Jimmy, o Jimmy" in Saturday's Warrior, there's not a dry eye in the house. Do we tear up because of the idea of Emily not being able to come to earth or because little Emily is so cute? I say, down with sentimentality! Give me a film that causes real emotion (like Glory) not fake emotion (live Love Story). Thom - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:40:23 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] STEWART/JENSON, "Almost Perfect" (Daily Herald) 'Almost Perfect' almost unwatchable ERIC D. SNIDER The Daily Herald on Friday, November 08 OREM -- "Almost Perfect" is a rare thing: A bad show that makes it easy to tell where it went wrong. Let us trace the trajectory of this new musical comedy, written by Doug Stewart ("Saturday's Warrior") with music by Merrill Jenson ("Legacy"). The trouble is not in the production. The sets are high- schoolish, yes, but bad sets do not make a bad show. The live orchestra, conducted by Sean Jackson, sounds fine. Most of the singing voices are good enough. The performances are adequate. Nor is the trouble with the direction, necessarily. James Arrington keeps the pace up as much as he can -- a near- impossibility considering how many extraneous numbers bog down the show. The trouble with "Almost Perfect" is in its initial concept: It doesn't have one. There is no story here. It borrows heavily from "Guys and Dolls" and "The Music Man" specifically, but more to the point, it borrows from every major musical theater work of the past 65 years, including a "dream ballet" that serves no purpose other than establishing that the authors have seen "Oklahoma!" Nothing in it is original or new, and that goes for Jenson's perfunctory Generic Musical Score, too. Set in 1941 in a watered-down version of the watered-down version of New York found in "Guys and Dolls," the show focuses on Jack Riley (Jeff McLean), whom we are told is a con man. His new idea is to marry rich LaRue Canfield (Allison Hawks) and take over her father's gun-manufacturing business. He will then install co-conspirator Eddy Schumacher (Kimball Wirig) as business manager, skim off the top and make a fortune before the company knows what hit it. Alas, immediately upon seeing Canfield employee Anna Caruso (Andrea Ingles), Jack falls in love. Somehow, he plans to woo Anna, not marry LaRue, and yet still get all the money. (He wants Eddy to marry LaRue instead, which means Eddy will have plenty of dough; I guess Jack expects him to share.) The conflicts are all standard musical-theater fare, as are their resolutions. What's stunning is how little effort is put into conveying them. For example, I knew LaRue and Eddy would wind up together -- they're both secondary characters, played mostly for laughs; that's what happens to characters like that - -- I just assumed the show would have it make sense somehow. But no, LaRue randomly decides, not two minutes after screaming about her undying love for Jack, that she's REALLY in love with Eddy. Doug Stewart knew he had to get LaRue off Jack's case so Jack would be free to marry Anna. All I can think is that Stewart couldn't think of a way to make that happen logically, so he gave up trying. Explaining what occurs in this show is like explaining a dream: "So LaRue's totally in love with Jack, but then she's in love with Eddy instead" makes as much sense as, "So I'm in my house, but then it's not my house anymore, it's an IHOP." Jack's a jerk, too, which is a hindrance. "Bad" guys who need to reform are one thing. Lying, conniving, manipulating, dishonest jackasses are something else. How is the audience expected to stay with the show when the lead character is so unlikable? Another character, Claudio (Clay Elder), is in love with Anna, which could make for a love triangle -- except that he's given an unnecessary character twist that removes any possible suspense over whom Anna will choose. I get the sense that everyone was doing the best with what they were given. Show up with bland dialogue, bland music and bland lyrics and yeah, you're going to get a bland show. D+ Copyright 2002 by HarkTheHerald.com _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 02:55:46 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Film And Its Critics Article JLTyner wrote: >=20 > There is an article by Kieth Merrill today on Meridian Magazine. > "Throwing Stones at Ourselves: LDS Film and Its Critics". >=20 > The link: www.ldsmag.com This article started out sounding like its conclusion would irritate me. Then Merrill appeared to swerve into sense-making territory as he insisted that LDS films must stand up to the most stringent criticism. But then he ruined it with the last paragraph (death wish paragraph, Eric?): "My final point is one I=92ve made before. If you fail to support the movies by LDS film makers who struggle to make a difference and who want to create family friendly films that run counter to popular culture =96 however imperfect and flawed their early attempts =96 then you forever forfeit your right to complain about Hollywood and the steady decline of popular culture." Bullcookies! I have no obligation to support films that I think are no good. Dutcher didn't need any wobbly-legged-giraffe period to come out with a critically acclaimed LDS film. He did it with his first one. And he did it back when everyone said LDS film couldn't be done. Why should we cut the latecomers any slack? (If you don't understand the wobbly-legged-giraffe reference, you didn't read the article!) - --=20 D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 12:00:19 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] KEMP, _The Welcoming Door_ Harper San Francisco (a division of Harper Collins specializing in inspirational books), has just released Kenny Kemp's newest novel, The Welcoming Door: Parables of a Carpenter. It is the first volume of a planned trilogy of novels about Jesus (Jeshua) as a young man, living out some of his future parables. Kenny (an AML-List member we have heard from from time to time) has his own web page about his movies, books, and other projects, which I found recently. There is a page of blurbs about the new book, including a review from Publisher's Weekly. Here is an excerpt from that review: "Deftly, Kemp creates a Jeshua who is human, who sometimes doubts himself, who becomes exhausted and frustrated, but who is the kind of man readers will wish they could work alongside or have as a brother. Such a thoughtful treatment of what Jesus would do when confronted with the characters and events of the parables makes this novel an effective and engaging illustration of Christian theology." The page about the book is: http://www.alta-films.com/books_twd_main.htm Kenny also has a page about writing the book: http://www.alta-films.com/books_twd_essay.htm Kenny is a model of an author who parlayed recognition gained through his self-published works (I Hated Heaven and Dad Was a Carpenter) to achieve a national book deal. The Welcoming Door looks pretty good, I plan to get it for Christmas. Andrew Hall Fukuoka, Japan _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 06:54:35 -0700 From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Jana Riess There are few books currently available written by women scholars who understand the mindset of our 19th century sisters. Jana Riess's articles, including her Protestant missionary article which I've read, are just the kind of scholarship many LDS would like to see more of. Does Riess have any intention to write a full-length book about 19th century mormon women? And on the side, does anyone know where can I obtain these other articles she's written on the subject, including the following: 1. No Zenanas in Zion: Mormon Women's Pro-Polygamy Discourse, 1870-1890, Columbia University 2. Sister-Wives: Mormon Women and Polygamy, Columbia University 3. "Worthy of Imitation": Mormon Pioneer Women as Heroines in the Late Nineteenth Century, (Sunstone 1996) Thanks! Kathy Fowkes - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 08:59:15 -0700 (MST) From: Fred C Pinnegar Subject: Re: [AML] Kofford Books (New Publisher) I am tremendously disappointed at how long it has taken Kofford Books to get Boyd Peterson's excellent biography of Hugh Nibley out the door. What has it been--five years now since I received your announcement that it would be out soon? And I still can't get a straight answer from Boyd about when it will be on the shelves. Fred Pinnegar - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:40:36 -0800 From: "jana" Subject: Re: [AML] Teaching at BYU I guess I see this as being different from having to have a temple recommend. For example, I could be doing all of the things described below but still not have a testimony of the Savior. I guess it's not all that important to me personally (since I am a card-carrying Mormon), but I"m just curious.... Jana Remy > This is from a brochure I received upon being hired as part-time > staff last week (and was read to me during the policy review): > > "As a matter of personal commitment, students, staff and faculty of > Brigham Young University seek to demonstrate, in daily living, those > moral virtues encompassed in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and will: > > - Be Honest > - Live a Chaste & Virtuous LIfe > - Obey the Law > - Use Clean Language > - Respect Others > - Abstain from Alcoholic Beverages, Tobacco, Tea, Coffee and Drug Abuse" > > In addition, the web site states "It is a condition of employment > that employees observe the behavioral standards of the University, > including the Honor Code and Dress and Grooming Standards. LDS > employees also accept as a condition of employment observance of the > standards qualifying them for temple privileges." - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:34:32 -0700 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Book of Mormon Movie Casting Call At 11:12 AM 11/7/02 -0500, you wrote: >I envision a movie filled with big-muscled, oily-skinned, weight-lifters, >something akin to the Steve Reeves movies of the 60s. If this turns out >to be the case, the BofM movies will have two widely diverse target >audiences--devout LDS, and gay men. Hey! Straight women enjoy this kind of scenery, too! When my son was in competitive bodybuilding, I didn't exactly suffer while waiting for his turn on the stage. (He was always the best one.) Someone described Arnold Friburg paintings as "prophets on steroids." To be fair, I do doubt that those men looked like today's sedentary, overweight couch-potato office workers. (Ooops, I just described myself.) barbara hume, in a strange mood today - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:47:45 -0700 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Jana Riess At 11:24 AM 11/7/02 -0700, you wrote: >Raised by an agnostic >mother and an atheist father, Riess attended Princeton Theological Seminary >and earned a doctorate in American religious history at Columbia University, >where she wrote her dissertation about 19th-century female Protestant >missionaries who tried to save Utah women from polygamy. That dissertation would make an interesting read, I'll bet. barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 10:12:59 -0700 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] New Age Mormons? (was: Epiphanies) I'm impressed, Kim. I've done Hatha Yoga, and kundalini Yoga has been recomended to me, but I've never found a teacher for Kundalini Yoga. I've settled on Toaist Ch'i Gung (also spelled Qigong). As I understand the goal of yoga is to raise energy to the upper chakras and leave it there. Yoga teaches the Nadis (also called the governing vessel) is a one way road, going from the sacrum. up the spine into the head and eventually connecting the person to heaven. I guess that's fine for most people, but I had a massive head-injury. If I get any excess energy in my head and leave it there I get a horrible, blinding head-ache. Then, of course, there's that "divine madness" thing. I already have a little problem with insanity and I don't want to add fuel to the fire. So for me yoga was out. The goal of Budhism is to transend the body, making healing irrelevant. There are schools of Ch'i Gung that are heavily influenced by Budhism, but I've never investigated because healing to me is paramount. I need it. Other people need it. Budhism rejects it. Just to get even I reject Budhism. The mandate of Taoism is to strengthen the body. To achieve this they clean out and strengthen the energy flows (organ meridians and strange flows). This is a never-ending process. It leads to healing of the physical body. It leads to mental and emotional healing (which I need). It leads to spiritual tranquility and bliss. It leads to love and respect for all of creation (ten thousand things, as the taoists say.) One of the strange flows Toaist Ch'i Gung works on is the Main Central Channel. The back half of this channel is called the governing vessel (equivalent to the nadis). Toaist teach energy can flow in either direction, but it is most beneficial for it to flow toward the head. The front half is called the conception vessel (which yoga ignores--at least I haven't found anything about it). It Brings energy back down the front of the body and helps a person connect with both heaven and earth. This makes Toaist Ch'i Gung much safer than Yoga. Most people don't have to worry about that. I do. Toaist Ch'i Gung also concentrates on the three Tan Tiens. Which is a concept foreign to Yoga. I volunteered to teach T'ai Ch'i in my ward. They didn't take me up on it. Just as well I don't think anybody would have gone. People in my ward seem to be a little wary of me. I guess trading punches with the second councilor didn't help much. I feel really bad about that. I don't know what happened. But, John the Baptist was a looney, too, so maybe there's room for me. Good Luck, Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 11:10:48 -0700 (MST) From: Melanie Dahlin Subject: Re: [AML] Lee Benson on _Charly_ I understand your point of view. You have a very persuasive argument. I agree that Weyland's novels are not the best, or even good, representations of Mormon Literature. (I am not promoting his literature.) I also agree, with the other comments made, that better quality literature will only result if readers develop their skills of literary analysis and criticism. I suppose what I have been trying to say is that we should at least consider the efforts of the past "pioneers" and use them as stepping stones to reach higher literary quality. It coincides with the old cliche, "Learn from the past, live in the present, and plan for the future." All is not lost in the LDS film and literature industry just yet. I would say more and clarify my meaning, but I don't have any more time. - ---Melanie Dahlin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 11:54:30 -0700 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Film And Its Critics Article Kathy Tyner wrote: > There is an article by Kieth Merrill today on Meridian Magazine. > "Throwing Stones at Ourselves: LDS Film and Its Critics". > > The link: www.ldsmag.com Merrill makes some excellent points in this article. There *are*more Mormon films being made right now than ever before, and I consider that to be a good thing. However, as Merrill chides Lee Benson for disliking "Mormon cheese" (and I have to point out that there is also a far less pleasant medical definition of "cheese" that seems more likely as the foundation for the epithet "cheesy") he falls into his own trap of defining sentimentality as the base state of Mormon culture--effectively arguing that "true" Mormon stories somehow must be sentimental or soft to be truly Mormon. While I have as many problems with easy sentimentality as most, I've gone to great lengths to defend the right of the sentimental story to both exist and be appreciated as a true reflection of *one* aspect of Mormon culture. Merrill is right; our culture and doctrine does directly support certain kinds of sentimentality, a certain hope that things can be right and wonderful and perfect all the time. It would be wonderful if we could always find the kernel of hope or the moment of grace or the outpouring of love and charity at all times and in all places. But while many of us hope for that kind of a social/cultural utopia, complete with instant spiritual gratification and reward, some of us also see very little of it in practical experience. Many of us see the struggle followed by either an ambiguous or utterly lacking spiritual reward. We exercise faith but get no clear feedback. We hope for goodness but see little of it. These are also true Mormon stories. In claiming that sentimentality is part of Mormon culture, let's not fall into the trap that Merrill himself warns of by claiming that it is *all* of Mormon culture. Not all gifts are given to all, and not everyone comes to understanding, peace, or acceptance by the same method. There are more true stories to be told, by more methods and metaphors than we're seeing. Sentimentality may be a reflection of one part of Mormon culture, but it's not the whole of our culture and it shouldn't be the sole functional voice of our culture. I hate the fact that 13 of 14 new Mormon films are sentimental message films, because that tells the rest of us that our struggles are not perceived as worthy or valid. There are more stories to be told--more true testimonies to be shared--than can be encompassed in a sentimental package. Until we stop declaring this or that to be *the* Mormon story or *the* true reflection of Mormon hope, we create artificial divisions among ourselves that have no meaning. Let us hope that those who want to tell difficult or violent or struggling stories aren't excluded from the screen because all available slots are filled with sentimental films. To Merrill's credit he disagrees with Benson in a mostly polite manner. We should not be afraid to argue our ideas and share our beliefs on this or any other matter. The day disagreement over what Mormons "should" be producing stops is the day when we have either completely succeeded in becoming one, or the day that we have utterly failed and lost our ability to choose. Until then, let the arguments continue. But let's at least try to be civil about it. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:20:01 -0700 From: Russ Asplund Subject: RE: [AML] LDS Film And Its Critics Article Yuck! "Yeah, I know I the roof leaks and the foundations is cracking--but I built this house in order to spread the gospel, and if you don't buy it, I won't be able to build better quality houses in the future." "Oh, I fixed your engine, but it doesn't get very good gas mileage and smoke pours out the rear end. But it's hard raising money as an LDS mechanic, so not paying me would only show your support of godless mechanics." >From the article: My final point is one I've made before. If you fail to support the movies by LDS film makers who struggle to make a difference and who want to create family friendly films that run counter to popular culture - however imperfect and flawed their early attempts - then you forever forfeit your right to complain about Hollywood and the steady decline of popular culture. I say: No I don't. I criticize Hollywood for its unmitigated sleaze every bit as much as I criticize some LDS movies for their unmitigated sentimentality. I don't have to choose to like one or the other--I can be appalled by both. And I can demand and support movies that deliver what I want. No other profession would ever claim that they should be supported just because they have good LDS motives--well, okay, a lot of Utah MLMs do exactly that, but that's the same kind of inappropriate pressure I feel is trying to be excerted here. Hating Charly and I'll Build You A Rainbow does not make me morally inferior. The fact is, when friends die there usually isn't a miracle to let you know they are okay on the other side--there is just faith. I'd rather see stories that celebrate the strenght that is required to maintain faith in what is often a cold and uncomforting world than stories that provide fictional comfort food. And I will not buy and enjoy any art simply because it pretend to believe what I belive--or even if it sincerely believes what I believe. It has to be good and I have to like it. Otherwise, it doesn't get my money--or even my silence. Russell Asplund - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:33:39 -0700 From: Russ Asplund Subject: RE: [AML] LDS Film And Its Critics Article Sorry, one more quote I had to being up: Granted, such delicate matters must be masterfully handled, but if main stream movies, dealing with Mormonism, are to have the impact that these faithful LDS film makers have in mind -- filled as they are with faith and youthful idealism -- they must be made with the kind of pointed honesty - - even sentimentality -- that is possible and important. Am I the only one that thinks that Sentimentality is the enemy of Pointed Honesty, not it's result? Pointed Honesty would require the admission that sometimes prayer are answered with a no. Sometimes the sick aren't healed and sometimes good people make mistakes. Even in the Book of Mormon we see a village put to the flame, and Alma powerless to stop it. Mind you, we also need to show that sometime miracles do happen--but without admitting that sometimes they don't, I feel we don't stand a chance of reaching the outside world. Sentimentality, to me, is an attempt to appeal to reflexive emotion--the same way a shock comedian knows they can get a laugh by dropping the f-bomb. Deep emotion, on the other hand, it thoughtful and reflective. Like true humor, it's a lot harder to evoke than the reflexive kind, but it seems to me that deep, true emotion is the goal of all great art. Sentimentality is a mere cheap imitation of that--and someone needs to be able to sort the true gold from fools gold. Rock on Lee Benson. Fight the good fight. If the movie was that good, they would have written 1000 words on how great it was--not 1000 words attacking it's critics. Russell Asplund - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 14:33:07 -0800 From: "jana" Subject: Re: [AML] New Age Mormons? (was: Epiphanies) Kim: A good connection of yoga/LDS faith is in Olga Camporava's book, _Saints Behind Enemy Lines_. Though it doesn't discuss much of yoga as a discipline, it tells the story of how yoga brought her and other young Czechs to the gospel before the Velvet Revolution. I feel indebted to Olga for inspiring my own yoga practice--I've studied for several years, under different teachers. I'm still a novice, and I somtimes struggle with the postures because of my physical disability, but it's still a great blessing in my life. Perhaps we could have a "Mo-ga" session/mediation at the next AML Conference :) Jana - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 15:59:22 -0700 From: Cathy Wilson Subject: Re: [AML] WILSON, _The Prelude to Glory_ Jerry Tyner wrote: > This is a dumb question but isn't this phone number (Call 310-587-0144) in the LA area code? > > Jerry Tyner > Orange County, CA Sure looks like it. I don't know much about the promotional aspect of this. I know Deseret Book is promoting and I don't know what else is being done. Cathy Wilson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 16:04:03 -0700 From: Cathy Wilson Subject: Re: [AML] Epiphanies I've been teaching about the brain and its chemistry at school and it made me curious about the whole process of epiphany and bliss and so on. We heard on the news that scientists think there is a "God spot" in the limbic system in the right temporal lobe that activates when we are praying or connecting with God. That's interesting, to pinpoint the actual place that gets active when we are alive spiritually. Over time I have trained myself to "go into" that state of delight and bliss and connectedness. My kids at school sometimes ask if I'm "on something" and I just tell them that they can take themselves there without any drugs. I find that prayers of gratitude and acts of kindness are very sure paths to that blessed state of bliss. Cathy Wilson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 02:25:16 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Book of Mormon Movie Casting Call Clark Goble wrote: > > ___ Eric ___ > | It's silly to say that Hollywood's preference for attractive > | people isn't sexist. > ___ > > If it applies to both sexes then it isn't sexist. It might be wrong. > It is discrimination. But it isn't sexist. I believe the word is "lookist." > They do all sorts of things like this. Ever notice the standard policy > of making "foreign languages" be all spoken with a British accent? They > almost never make the accent sound like the real accent unless it is an > accent spoken in English. I don't know what you're talking about here. You mean foreign people when supposedly speaking in their own tongue, but really speaking English on screen for the sake of the audience, use a British accent to indicate foreignness? Then I have to disagree. Every WW2 film on Earth has Germans speaking with German accents. It's obligatory. > Phone calls, for instance, > are highly stylized and many aspects of film seem to borrow from > phenomena in dreams. I have no idea what this means. > I think it is impossible to make a good > movie of the Book of Mormon because there is too much there. Perhaps a > story of Nephi coming to America. Or a story of Ammon. Perhaps even a > story of Moroni. But the whole thing? What's the point? I didn't know any of the current Book of Mormon projects _were_ doing the whole book in one movie. I thought they were planning a series of movies. - -- 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: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 08:22:48 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] SAMUELSEN, _Peculiarities_ Barbara' Hume's analysis of PECULIARITIES is so astute. Nobody knows she's a master at romance--but I found out she has a romance novel that won some second prize in a national contest and is being looked at by a big romance publisher. I'm impressed! She certainly has a savvy for the ins and outs of relationships. And I thank Eric Samuelsen for giving us in PECULIARITIES something really substantial to sink our teeth into! Marilyn Brown - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 08:53:44 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Film And Its Critics Article Thanks, Kathy, for calling our attention to this! I am so impressed with this article, "Throwing Stones at ourselves" in Meridian! Its content expresses every notion I've ever believed about the difference between our Mormon art and the art of the nation. I also wish Eric Snider would take this article to heart. The words of President Kimball: "Our motion picture specialists must be purified by the best critics," (and this goes for literature also) admits the vitriolic writing of Eric Snider as something we must pay attention to! But I love the compassion in Kieth Merrill's voice. Thanks, Meridian for a terrific read! Marilyn Brown - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 13:32:22 -0500 From: lwilkins@fas.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [AML] Jana Riess Jana recently had a book published called _The Spiritual Traveler: Boston and New England_ (or something similar). I'd like to know something about her experiences working on that book, and whether Mormon 'sacred spaces' played a role for her. Laraine - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:54:23 -0700 From: "Jim and Laurel" Subject: RE: [AML] AML Conference Question I appreciated the responses to my question - I've passed on the information to my friend and I expect Kofford and/or Cedar Fort will be hearing from her soon. Thanks for all your help! Laurel Brady - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 21:59:08 -0600 From: Linda Adams Subject: RE: [AML] Y'All Need to Get Out More Apparently, Jacob, I've struck a nerve, and I apologize. Allow me to try to clarify. But most of your post actually validates what I was trying to say, even though you were disagreeing with me. >Speaking as someone who has lived in the "mission field" (though I haven't >heard it called that since I was a kid) for your proscribed five years and >more, I have been trapped in Utah the last three and a half years and I >can tell you that you don't have the whole picture. No, I'm sure I don't; but observe your own words, "trapped in Utah" and remember please that my comments were not actually directed to you: my post was geared toward native Utahns, as should have been clear. I was talking to people who have never left the state. You are not a native Utahn. And by your own admission, you feel trapped. So would I. You are not pleased with many of the aspects of living in Utah. I agree. I was in Utah only three days last weekend, and heard my home called the "mission field" at least once. Members of my ward from Utah _still_ call Missouri the "mission field," after living here over seven years. I'm *surprised* you haven't come across it at all yet. (I was also offered green jello for breakfast. I politely declined, and about died laughing.) On a personal note, so you may know that I *am* more aware of how it is there than I came across, I have watched my immediate family, ALL of them, leave Church activity as a direct result of living IN UTAH. True, I only spent the obligatory four BYU years living there, but my family lived there longer. I know how it was for them. I observed many heart-wrenching things happen to my family as a result of interacting with Utah Mormons, beginning with unpleasant reactions of Utah ward members to my sister (moving home after her first divorce: the dreaded Single Mother), and increasing when my mother attempted going to a new ward alone, the wife of a _less-active_ man. The stigma! No, I can honestly report, you won't find those shameful attitudes *nearly* so prevalent outside Utah. My family left Utah after enduring all they could take. My brother, I am happy to report, is going back to church, after many trials of his own. The social damage my parents and my sister suffered may prove irreparable. I don't know if they will ever return to activity in Church. My parents, I believe, still have testimonies somewhere, but my sister's might well be shattered. It's hard to say; I'm the last to judge, and will be the happiest to see them come back into the fold. >We are not the clear majority we used to be and that has cracked our >provincialism to an extent yet to be recognized in our literature or art. Isn't that part of what I was trying to say? That such things are NOT recognized in our literature or art, and ought to be? >Salt Lake has as much vice as any other city its size and the problems >that go with it. It also has as much opportunity for expansive experience >as any other city its size and possibly more. I didn't say the vice and problems weren't there. And my city, Kansas City, is probably less cultured overall than Salt Lake is. I've been hard-pressed to find theater of any sort alive and well, outside the obligatory big-budget Broadway tours and a couple of dinner theaters doing "popular" shows with traveling celebrities. The Missouri natives are a breed all their own (Mormon or non), possibly funnier than Utah Mormons and even more homogeneous. I wasn't commenting on similarity of actual life experience, so much as a mindset I found apparent from several comments prevalent at the conference. You weren't there to hear them, though. One person mentioned, "We're so geographically isolated." I had to scratch my head. Millions of members worldwide? Isolated? No, he must have meant Utah Mormons. I certainly don't feel isolated in any sense. I don't have that unique-to-Utah perspective of Us vs. The World Outside. (Another reason Brigham City was so *excellent,* BTW, was that it dramatized this perspective very well.) >Second, those who are *not* LDS are often actively hostile to Mormons to >an extent I did not find outside Utah. Yes, and have you stopped to think about WHY that is? > I've been threatened with physical violence for being "one of those > arrogant Mormons" during a traffic dispute that would have ended with a > simple finger wave anywhere else. Exactly. "Arrogant Mormons." That is the reputation. Mormons who ward off their children from playing at non-members' houses. Mormons who keep to their own kind, and if you are not interested in becoming one, will treat you as a sub-citizen. >(who complimented me for not being a typical Mormon, whatever that >means--I should probably be offended). No, it probably really is a compliment. Because you probably don't subscribe to the behaviors I described above (both of which I personally know have happened), and that's a *good* thing. I have a close friend who came back into activity after a long absence, and she claims/blames me for it in part--she says I showed her, through being myself, that she didn't have to be a typical "Molly Mormon" (i.e. perfect) to be a _good_ Mormon. No, canning fruit is not a requirement to enter the Celestial Kingdom. Amazing concept. > Regular business relations are heavily complicated by my >Mormonism here in ways that would have no meaning outside Utah.. [snip]. . >. It's tense and it's >inevitable and there is no cure for it as long as Mormons are a >substantial part of the population here. I know that. That's what I was fussing about. "Getting out more" might help solve these problems. Help the natives relax a bit. It's a good thing to get a feel for how it is in other places. The way I see it, if we're to be the salt of the earth, and all that salt is squashed into one place, that's not Salt Lake, that's a Salt Lick. And salt licks are not a form of salt that is easily ingested by most human beings. Salt is not meant to be that concentrated. It's just not a good thing. So get out and scatter that salt. >Third, Mormons here are no more likely to invite the missionaries in than >anywhere else I've ever been. Less likely in most cases because most of >our non member friends not only have Book of Mormons, they've likely had a >number of discussions, probably know who their Stake President is, and >have attended a missionary farewell within the past >year (well, if they have kids anyway). Well, that describes a good chunk of my non-member friends too, especially the closest ones. Because I do tell them about what I believe; otherwise they can't understand me fully and I have to spend unnecessary time translating lingo. It's easier to take them through a few discussions to explain it. >Finally, I'd love to get out more, but I'd rather have a date with >Melissa (who is sadly neglected, frankly) than try to find common cause >with the hunter across the street. Going out with Melissa IS getting out. :-) You need to do that! Of course your family has higher priority than outside friendships. But my comments were not personally directed at *you.* And I meant, get out of Utah more. Which you probably wouldn't mind too much either--if it were a viable option, wouldn't you prefer going back to the Northwest? I'm sorry; I probably have offended more than one of you, who aren't speaking up. All of you Utah natives can please write in and holler at me about how wrong I am about your state. And I'm not saying there aren't good things to be had there: do you know how cool it is to live in close proximity to at least ten operating temples? Do you realize how nice it is NOT to have to drive four hours each way and do very creative babysitting arrangements, just to go through one temple session? That you don't have to wait for one such special trip just to buy your underwear? That if you feel like it, you can just hop up to the Conference Center in April and bask in the presence of the Prophet? Do you know how nice it is to stand in line and make a comment about stuff you're getting for Relief Society, and the sister behind you understands? How nifty to see garment lines on so many people and know you're in good company? To mention you have six kids and NOT have people faint dead away from shock? Yeah. Utah does have some cool features. . . . I was simply trying to present the POV of an outsider of some prevalent attitudes I noticed while I was at the conference. And to me, a simple solution is that if you leave the state, it's easier to gain a better perspective on how it is in the rest of the world. Because in the "rest of the world," non-members are not so hostile towards you as they are in Utah. Really. Business relationships are not so strained. Really. You just go to the obligatory Staff Happy Hour at the bar-and-grill and order milk. And you learn that Deer Hunt opening day is NOT a "national" holiday. And by golly, surprise, surprise, neither is July 24th. Our Mormon oddities are greeted with a simple, mild curiosity. (My husband has regular "So what do you do for. . .?" type conversations with his Muslim boss.) All I'm saying is I seemed to encounter some odd assumptions during the workshop sessions of the conference, that didn't fit with my experience as one who has lived most of my life outside the Book of Mormon Belt. And if the LDS publishing and artistic industry is operating on those assumptions, they are missing a whole lot of the rest of the story. Linda Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo/linda - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #889 ******************************