From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #916 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 Thursday, December 5 2002 Volume 01 : Number 916 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 09:52:11 -0700 From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Titanic on 12/3/02 12:06 PM, err22@email.byu.edu at err22@email.byu.edu wrote: > I don=B9t quite understand this argument. It seems to suggest that art > should not seek to depict a solemn thing such as a gruesome death and > entertain at the same time. I must confess that I have sat back with popc= orn > and watched The Lamb of God. And I=B9m sure at one point they had to say "c= ut" > and the actor portraying Jesus had to take a shower and put on some cloth= es. > Entertainment is pretty subjective. I think that learning and growing is > entertaining =AD even if that process is somewhat disturbing. You can watch > Saving Private Ryan and be malevolently entertained by the killing or rou= sed > by > the questions concerning the human condition that it raises and touched b= y the > messages it sends. The same goes for the seminary video depicting Captain > Moroni and the war against the Lamanites, The Lamb of God, and as Richard > Dutcher pointed out, even for Titanic. Again it falls to perspective. You= see > what you want to see. >=20 > Eric Russell >=20 >=20 When I saw _Unforgiven_ I ran into an example of this. Clint Eastwood's character was a reformed bad man who hadn't touched a drop of alcohol in years, but when his friend (Morgan Freeman) is killed he picks up a bottle of whiskey and starts to drink. It was a grim, dreadful moment--all the good that he had been trying to return to was just gone. I felt chills dow= n my spine and swallowed hard. The a couple of kids a few rows up started cheering. Cognitive dissonance city. Then I realized that they were just waiting for the shooting to start. They'd missed the whole point. As for _Titanic_, it is a detestable movie that doesn't make any point, so there's no point in defending it. My great-grandfather had tickets on the Titanic--I knew all about it when I was a wee kiddie. They made enough mistakes in that movie to choke all the king's horses. A horrible tragedy used as a backdrop for a crappy Harlequin romance is not a good mix. Thus the difference between cheap thrills and actual literature (even if it's on the screen). Of course for some people the finer things are lost anyway, but there's no point trying to please them, because it's all too easy. Jim Wilson aka the Laird Jim - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:27:24 -0700 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Titanic Eric Rusell wrote: The same goes for the seminary video depicting Captain Moroni and the war against the Lamanites, The Lamb of God, and as Richard Dutcher pointed out, even for Titanic. Again it falls to perspective. You see what you want to see. Not want you --WANT-- to see. You see what you're --EXPECTING-- to see. That happens in all part of reality. It even happens in spirituality. The Cambodians are terrified of ghosts, because they expect all ghosts to be malevolent. That's what they expect and that what they get. The English (the most haunted country in the world) believe ghosts keep to themselves pretty much. That's what they expect and that's what they get. The Catholics have record (literary tie-in) of many great miracles. They expect the compassion of God in their lives, and that's what they get. This is what's interesting (Mormon tie in), I have trouble looking at pictures of the Madonna or Tara or Kwan Yin, because to me they represent the compassion of God or God, the Destroyer's good side. I have a hard time expecting the compassion of God, so I have a hard time getting it. What I do expect is work--daily damnedable work, daily proving myself worthy--and that's what I get. And to be perfectly honest I think I prefer it this way. It may take a hell of a lot longer to get where I want to be, but I'm learning a lot. Most importantly--I understand what I'm learning. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:38:56 -0700 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] The Avenging Angel You realize, Richard, that it is your duty to all Church history fans out here (okay, maybe just me), to see to it that your relative's journal is published. Thom Duncan >-----Original Message----- >At 11:57 AM 11/28/02 -0700, you wrote: >Actually Luman Andros Shurtliff, my maternal grandfather's >grandfather writes in his journal a rather detailed story of >his career as a Danite, and how the Danites eventually became >the Nauvoo Legion, and how frustrating it was that they never >really accomplished anything except drilling and using what >eventually became temple dialogue as "passwords and signs". >Richard B. Johnson, (djdick@PuppenRich.com) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:55:49 -0600 (CST) From: Rich Hammett Subject: Re: [AML] The Role of the Reader On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Lynette Jones sed: [snip] > So, yes, life is holy. The scriptures refer to those things that > would be rated R in a light that keeps them sacred. If a book keeps them > sacred while talking about them, there may be room for it on more than a > handful of shelves. [snip] I've seen a couple of people refer to this, and I just don't see it. In what way does scripture keep them sacred? (That's not a rhetorical question) For instance, the complete story of Lot's daughters from the Authorized Version is given in Gen 19:31-38 : - --------------- And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth: Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. And the first born bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day. And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same is the father of the children of Ammon unto this day. - --------------- What makes this sacred, that wouldn't apply equally to any other book with such a scene? (Of course, they could be doing it also for revenge, since daddy just offered them to a mob to be raped and killed, but that's an entirely different story.) rich - -- \ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett / rhammett@HiWAAY.net "Better the pride that resides / in a citizen of the world; \ than the pride that divides / when a colorful rag is unfurled." - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:53:58 -0700 From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Adam Sandler Movies Margaret wrote: MAYBE someone could persuade me that one of his movies was worth my time, but it would take a lot of persuasion. There's only one movie of his that you might like--and that's only if you're a child of the 80s like me. I agree that Adam Sandler pretty much is worthless, and like Margaret I haven't seen that much of him outside of a few previews and some SNL stuff. I did enjoy "The Wedding Singer." It's not high art, but it's cute and not offensive like Adam Sandler usually is. As a child of the 80s I loved the music and the styles (like leg warmers and big hair). I almost forgave both Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore for being themselves. Not that I'll ever bother seeing another Adam Sandler movie again. I think this one was a fluke of nature. Annette Lyon - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 12:04:15 -0600 From: pdhunter@wt.net Subject: [AML] Survey for LDS Film Student Trevor Hill is a young Latter-day Saint film student who is completing his thesis about LDS film. He would like as many people as possible to complete a brief survey about the subject. The survey can be found at: http://www.aumfilm.org/lds_film_survey.html So far 300 people have participated. The survey asks which of the LDS-themed feature films you have seen, and asks some basic demographic questions, as well as questions such as How well do you think these films reflect LDS culture?, etc. I'd like to encourage everybody to participate in this brief survey and help an aspiring filmmaker out in his research. He has said he will post the paper he is writing (including survey results) on the LDSFilm.com website. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:30:58 -0700 From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] New DB Policy ___ Jeff ___ | Outside of Utah, Deseret Book is indeed pretty much | the *only* outlet for LDS-oriented literature. ___ *cough* Amazon *cough* In my opinion Deseret Book is oriented towards the very mainstream of the church and doesn't want to move outside of that. It has fairly sappy and sentimental fiction and essays. It has collections of sanitized GA histories along with their writings. Their "daring" sections involve various odd speculations on the last days and other apocalyptic writings - so long as they support the mainstream. There's nothing wrong with that. Indeed I think it as wise business strategy. And many members like that because they know whatever they buy it will fit with their desires. However the fact of the matter is it is SO easy to buy books from Amazon or Barnes and Noble. Further they have huge writeups and reviews and even offer you suggestions on similar books. It is no longer difficult to get church oriented books outside of Utah. Indeed Amazon offers a better selection than you can get *in* Utah. It even links to used bookstores so you can find out of print books. So why the big worry about Deseret Books? [Clark Goble] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 20:22:29 -0700 From: amyc@xmission.com Subject: Re: [AML] Sheri Dew on New DB Policy Quoting katie@aros.net: > All right, guys. I asked permission to post Sister Dew's remarks, so I > feel > somewhat responsible for the negative comments that have gone out > regarding > them. Negative comments? I didn't see any. I saw lots of confusion. I personally am confused, but not negative. OK, maybe I AM rolling my eyes at DB a little. Just a little. > Obviously it's not that easy. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, > and opinions are difficult to change. It's perfectly possible to change my opinion if the person speaking is logical, reasonable, and intelligent. > I don't see an inconsistency with her statements that "This was an > economic/business/product decision and not a moral one" and "Believe me, > we > absolutely could have sold many copies of this book and thus have > foregone > revenue by the approach we have taken...." Huh. Really? The more I look at them, the more they seem fundamentally incompatible to me. To each her own, I guess. because of what else she says: > "It > is, however, our responsibility to try and fill our shelves with product > that > our customers want, will appreciate, and will come back for." This statement agrees with Dew's second statement above--the one where she says that it WAS a moral decision--but contradicts the part where she says it's purely a business decision. So I'm still confused. That's the > key. > What I feel that she's saying here (my interpretation) is that they could > have > sold tons of copies of _The Last Promise_; Evans has a great reputation > for > warm, fuzzy, moral stories. Yes, DB would have made lots of money off of > it. > BUT how many of these customers will then be bothered by the content of > the > book once they actually read it? Yes, Dew IS saying "It's a moral decision" here, as you say. And that squares with the statement "it's a purely business decision" exactly how? I'd still like someone to explain that particular dichotomy to me. I'm eagerly waiting. What other books would DB be obligated > to > carry if they let the Evans book slip through? And how many customers > will no > longer trust Deseret Book as a place to buy "safe" material? Ultimately > this > could have a greater impact on their sales. Okay, fine, this is a morality argument. Dew's welcome to go that route. But then she can't argue that it's purely a business decision. She can't have it both ways. Choose a side and stick to it. > > For those of you bothered by the concept that DB should carry only books > that > meet certain standards, you're welcome to shop elsewhere. This is an old, old argument, and one I don't find especially compelling anymore. Sure, I have the right NOT to shop at DB. But I also have the right, as a Church member, to state my confusion about their policy. I'm not even talking about where I'll buy my books. I'm talking about understanding Dew's stated policy. This "shop somewhere else" argument is irrelevant. Amy Chamberlain - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 19:56:35 -0800 From: Kathy and Jerry Tyner Subject: Re: [AML] Tickets and Temple Recommends Unfortunately it does happen. A guy we know who is on wife number #5 now had to be dragged into court by his first wife to get the proper amount of child support due her. He would try all kinds of things to hide the money, pull all kinds of accounting tricks like make sure his salary was kept low and get things he wanted for personal use charged off as business expenses and state on paper that property in question was in his relative's name, when in fact, that was not the truth. But he never had any problem looking leadership in the eye and lying to them about that and other questions. We do recommends on the honor system and no one is asked to produce proof that they are honoring that commitment. However, if someone tells the Bishop about them not, they are expected to prove it or you have a "he said/she said" And sometimes even when you do provide proof, they receive no consequences for their actions. (At least not in this life). His first wife decided it wasn't worth the hassle. (And yes, there are smarmy women who are dishonest too). Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA - ----- Original Message ----- > Um. When was this? For many years, one of the criteria for receiving a > Temple Recommend is that you have fulfilled all child support and > alimony obligations. If he isn't paying child support and he's flashing > his recommend to try for leniency, then he's violating more than just > the law of the land. > > Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:25:24 -0800 From: Robert Slaven Subject: Re: [AML] Film-Adapted Mormon Authors From: "Kumiko" > > It's an interesting thought that a movie version of Richard Paul Evans new > book _The Last Promise_ will probably be made before an adaptation of Orson > Scott Card's _Ender's Game_ is ever produced. > > Below are LDS/Mormon authors I am aware of whose works have already been > adapted to film. (Books/stories and film titles are shown compiled at: > http://www.ldsfilm.com/lds_aut.html). Is anybody missing? > One interesting fact is that one of the best known contemporary Latter-day > Saint authors -- Orson Scott Card -- has never had one of this books or > stories adapted to film. He has written numerous screenplays which have been > produced -- mostly animated Living Scriptures videos, but also the live > action short "Remind Me Again." But as an AUTHOR (rather than SCREENWRITER), > Card has never had anything filmed. (Although there have been many contracts > signed and plans made.) > > Preston Hunter Having followed Br. Card's career somewhat, including reading his opinions on places like his website www.hatrack.org, the primary reason for this is because he wants a *lot* of control over how things are done. He is just well-acquainted enough with the Hollywood process -- you should hear the things he has to say about James Cameron after having worked with him on the novelisation of 'The Abyss' -- to have no interest in just signing away the film rights and running away with the cheque. Ender's Game, I believe, has gotten as far as having a major studio (Universal) and a major director (Wolfgang Petersen, 'Das Boot'). So there's hope the thing will be out sometime by 2005. His short story Dogwalker was being made into a film by some indies, but I don't know where that's at right now. Two of his relatively-recent books, Homebody and Enchantment, were written with the screen in mind (IIRC, he said he wrote screenplays first and then turned them into novels). Br. Card obviously shares some of his concerns vis-a-vis Hollywood with J.K. Rowling. She held out on the Harry Potter film rights for the longest time, for precisely the same reason; she wanted heavy control, didn't want the 'franchise' to be ruined, didn't want to just run away with a cheque. As a result, she has a lot of input into the movies and the merchandising, because the offer she accepted from Warner Bros. provided that. She had received numerous previous offers from others (and probably WB, too) which didn't provide those things, and she turned them all down. I believe Br. Card has turned down a buttload of offers for the Ender's Game movie rights as well. Now, we'll just see if Br. Card's stubbornness turns out to have as wonderful a payoff (both in terms of excellent movies and major bucks) as Ms. Rowling's stubbornness led to. 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) - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 2002/11/25 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 21:45:55 -0700 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] New DB Policy On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:52:53 EST, RichardDutcher@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 11/27/02 12:34:35 PM Mountain Standard Time,=20 >Melissa@Proffitt.com writes: > ><< I find the > movie "Titanic" so offensive that I refuse to see it regardless of = whether > the naughty bits are edited out. >> > >This is a strange statement to me. How can you be offended by a movie = you=20 >haven't seen? Have the opinions of others closed your mind? I would be=20 >interested to know why "Titanic" is so offensive.=20 Ahem. If the opinions of others had closed my mind, I would be earnestly convinced that "Titanic" is the best movie ever made which represents the best love story ever experienced in reality or on screen. Initially I did not see the movie because I was enormously pregnant, = which means that I was enormously over-sensitive to images of small children drowning in icy water or trapped in a sinking ship. But I still intended= to watch it eventually. During this period I was surrounded by people, = mostly women, who insisted on telling me all about it in great detail because = they loved it so much. This is when my opinion started to change. From their descriptions, I began to realize that this was a story in which poverty = is depicted as inherently virtuous, wealth is depicted as inherently evil, = and a first love who dies can be your one true love forever--and that's a = Good Thing. The issue of nudity was irrelevant to me; I don't go out of my = way to watch movies with naked people making the beast with two backs, but = that won't keep me from watching them either. And it sounded like whatever = Rose was baring didn't have a lot of sexuality in it. It was all the other textual elements that made me certain that I would gain nothing of value = in watching the movie. So that's what makes it offensive to me. I think there are far more dangerous things in movies than the ones that would be edited out by CleanFlicks. I also think that one need not see a movie to make the decision that it's not worth seeing. That's what previews and friends = are for. And trusted reviewers. I still miss Gene Siskel. >I know a young filmmaker who earnestly believes that Jack, the Leonardo=20 >DiCaprio character, is a Christ figure and that the story can be = interpreted=20 >as the story of a woman's relationship with her Savior. > >It's a compelling argument, with a lot of internal support from the = film.=20 >Think of Jack at the front of the ship, his arms stretched out in a pose= that=20 >recalls the crucifixion. Think of how Jack teaches Rose "how to love" = and=20 >"how to live." He even gives his life for her. She lives her life, = devoted to=20 >him, and is then reunited with him after her own death. Do you think his interpretation ought to be the only one? Or the one = that everyone sees when they watch the movie? Or that I, influenced by my irritation with gratuitous Troo Luv in any form, would watch "Titanic" = and have his experience instead? What you say below is very true: >We see what we're looking for, I guess. Some see only boobs in = "Titanic."=20 >Others see Christ. And I would add that because our interpretations of literature (whether = in film or in prose) differ according to our experiences, or our desires, = that no one person's idea of what's offensive ought to govern anyone else's. Which is exactly what I was trying to point out in saying that I find "Titanic" offensive. I don't think anyone else should be offended by it = and I never once told my sister-in-law, the rabidly drooling Leonardo = DiCaprio fan, that she was a nitwit and morally bankrupt. To bring this back in = line with the topic heading, Deseret Book has every right to choose which = books they will stock and why. It's the patrons who influence this decision = who scare me: not the reasonable ones who have set firm limits for themselves= in their reading, but the ones who assume that they have figured out what = "the best books" really are, have an annotated list for you, and consider you headed for hell if you don't agree. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 21:57:07 -0700 From: Boyd Petersen Subject: Re: [AML] Titanic on 12/4/02 8:50 PM, RichardDutcher@aol.com wrote: > And, personally, if I were to die horribly, especially if my death was the > result of someone else's malice or foolishness, then I would certainly want > the story told. And told well. > > Richard Dutcher > Unfortunately, the real tragedy of Titanic the movie was that the REAL tragedy of that story was overshadowed by a sappy love story. Here we have a tale about the undoing of hubris, of a civilization that thought they had built the unsinkable boat and the horrible consequences of their assuming they were right, and it all gets boiled down to steamy windows. That's what offended me about the film. - --Boyd Petersen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:13:25 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Gratitude I haven't participated in this thread because I don't get it. As far as I can figure out, a bunch of Mormons have found yet another way to feel guilty: it's now evil to be thankful for one's blessings. - -- 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 ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #916 ******************************