From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #12 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 Tuesday, April 8 2003 Volume 02 : Number 012 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 09:35:32 -0700 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Elizabeth Smart > Robert Slaven wrote: OTOH, how many parents from her > ward/stake/SLC generally will tell their young men "Stay away > from her, she's tainted" or "after what she's been through, > she'll mess you up" or whatever it is they might say. > I wouldn't be at all surprised if she felt "Well, I'm > 'damaged goods' anyway, so there's no point going home." She > may have thought that on her own thanks to our cultural > hang-ups, her captors may have planted the idea in her head, > or (most likely) both fed off of each other. That will happen. I don't think it will spoken much. People will avoid her somewhat mostly because they don't know what to say. A few will avoid her because of the damaged goods thing. A few will avoid her because her presence suggests that bad things can happen in Zion and they would rather not have to deal with that idea. She will come to avoid people for pretty much the same reasons. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 14:03:20 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Artists' Personal Lives RichardDutcher@aol.com wrote: > Having said that, I think it is interesting that Roman Polanski, who once > sexually forced himself on a 13-year-old girl, has crafted the most > beautiful, sincere, spiritual, and wrenchingly human film of the year. > Perhaps our judgment of his character is flawed. Perhaps Roman Polanski is a > basically good man who made a very, very bad mistake. I never really paid much attention to the Polanski controversy. Then just found out that he committed his crime years and years and years ago. With all the hullaballoo over it, I thought it has been a recent thing. Has it occurred to anyone that maybe Polanski has repented of his sin since then? - -- 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, 5 Apr 2003 16:18:51 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: RE: [AML] Words and Music - --- David Hansen wrote: > The OTC performance was bittersweet for me knowing that it would be > Barlow > Bradford's last performance with OTC. (He didn't mention it at the > concert, > BTW.) [snip] > This is one of the reasons I love AML-List: you find out a lot of information you just don't get anywhere else. I'm not sure another literary list would be as successful because this one enjoys the cachet of affiliation with a respected institution (AML) thus attracting some truly gifted people, and a moderator with common sense who insures that all voices get heard, not just the most strident. I sensed there was something different about the Mahler concert (especially when Bradford was overcome by emotion at the beginning) but had no idea what was behind it. I hope the church doesn't begin to see music (or the arts in general) as a merely "utilitarian" missionary tool. For one thing, I'm pretty sure the great majority of those in the Tabernacle that night were church members of varying degrees of activity. The goodwill generated by these concerts in the community surely outweighs any numerical count of "referrals" gotten at one of them. And Utah Chamber Artists sounds cool. I'll definitely check them out. Thanks again, ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 00:20:11 -0800 From: "Jongiorgi Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Books on Tape Barbara Hume noted: "I've listened to quite a few LDS novels on tape, but I don't usually enjoy the narrator. They usually are not skilled actors like Rosenblatt, who uses different voices and plays all the parts." Just a note in passing to anyone out there who produces LDS books-on-tape... there are a few of us professional actors and experienced readers who would love to be hired to use different voices and play all of the parts... Give us a call some time! Jongiorgi & friends - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 16:02:51 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Conservative Literary Theory? - --- Nan McCulloch wrote: > P. J. O'Rourke does make good arguments and is funny. Have you read any > of > Jonah Goldberg's funny stuff? He writes for National Review, as well. > A good source of conservative literary criticism is "The New Criterion." http://www.newcriterion.com It was founded by Hilton Kramer, former art critic of "The New York Times" and a leading "neo-conservative." (And there ain't a hell of a lot of "theory" in his magazine.) I guess you could say he is a Modernist who disapproves of the politicial side of hard-core post-modernism. As Justin Halverson notes, a lot of literary theory is just nihilism in drag. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 18:06:30 -0500 From: "Amelia Parkin" Subject: RE: [AML] Elizabeth Smart Jacob wrote: I *hope* she didn't get that message from our doctrine. It'd represent a serious mis-understanding of what was supposed to be taught. If we're teaching our teens that rape is always the woman's fault then we're in some serious trouble. and then Jerry Tyner wrote in response: I feel like Jacob. Anyone who interprets our doctrine in such a way that child molestation and rape are the fault of the girl or woman needs to examine this feeling and there understanding. It did not come from any of the revelations or doctrines taught now or in the past. I almost responded to Jacob but I was short on time that night so I didn't. I'll respond to both Jacob and Jerry here. I agree fully. Our doctrine does not support the idea that a victim of rape or sexual abuse or any other sinful act is responsible or guilty in any form. But I will draw a distinction between our doctrine and the way in which some of our doctrine is taught. As a young woman and as a young single adult I have often been instructed by my bishops and other leaders about obeying the law of chastity. I would say that about 99% of the time that law is presented in terms of keeping oneself pure. And keeping oneself pure is defined as abstaining from sexual acts prohibited by the law of chastity. And most of the time we are told that we deserve someone else who is pure. I do not disagree with any of this. What I take issue with is the fact that rarely have I had my biships or my leaders go on and explain that purity can exist in spite of having participated in sexual acts. That purity has much more to do with a state of mind and soul than it has to do with what acts have been engaged in. Unfortunately, the result of associating purity with abstinence and impurity with sexual activity is that anyone who has any experience with sex, regardless of what the acts are, carries a little bit of the taint of impurity. it's an association we are taught to make. And even though we mentally realize that a victim is not impure or that repentance returns someone to a state of purity, too often the associations exist on a subconsious level where they cannot be dealt with because we are unaware of them. I'm not such a pessimist that I think Elizabeth Smart will be treated as an outcast. Her case is much more nuanced than that and it has been so widely publicized that people will be more aware of her powerlessness and her status as a victim. But i do think it is a reality that within Mormonism there is a tendency to link sexual experience before marriage with impurity and that tendency is much stronger that we admit or even realize. it has nothing to do with doctrine. just with our imperfect ways of teaching and understanding doctrine. amelia parkin _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 16:47:04 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] LABUTE, _Bash_ (Utah production) Weber State University in Ogden, Utah is presenting what it calls "the first Utah production" of Neil LaBute's controversial plays, "Bash" on May 1-3. Details can be found at: http://departments.weber.edu/performingarts/Events/NewsReleases/0430%20Bash.htm ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 17:48:13 -0800 (PST) From: Mary Aagard Subject: Re: [AML] Artists' Personal Lives - --- RichardDutcher@aol.com wrote: > Having said that, I think it is interesting that > Roman Polanski, who once > sexually forced himself on a 13-year-old girl, has > crafted the most > beautiful, sincere, spiritual, and wrenchingly human > film of the year. > Perhaps our judgment of his character is flawed. > Perhaps Roman Polanski is a > basically good man who made a very, very bad > mistake. > > Perhaps a man is more than his sins. Definitely, a man is more than his sins, but what about paying for your crime? What about paying for your sins? Polanski raped a girl, a girl, and skipped town. Yeah, there was a plea bargain that might have kept him out of jail but fearing the risk of being incarcerated, he left the country. Is that paying for your sins? (Is this what Deseret Book is worried about?) Polanski most probably would have been serving jail time when he made _Tess_. That seems a lot like getting away with your sins. Admittedly, the girl who is now a woman who suffers the most from Polanski's transgression, said that his film shouldn't be judged by his crime. So, _The Pianist_ stands alone to be judged by its own merits, but what about the movies he made when he should have been in jail? _The Pianist_ reflects Polanski's experiences as a Polish Jew during World War II. Everybody recognizes the Holocaust as a tragedy, but what about the raping of a young woman? Will Polanski make a film about his own lecherous and vile actions? Will anybody watch it? I hope not. Mary Aagard __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 21:38:19 -0700 From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Artists' Personal Lives Richard Dutcher writes Perhaps a man is more than his sins. For my sake, I certainly hope so. Personally, I don't believe the man who made "The Pianist" can be dismissed as evil. The fruit is too good for the tree to be bad. Let's leave the judgment of Roman Polanski to God and, in the meantime, thank him for a beautiful film. Bravo! Well said! IMHO I think all too often we judge a book not only by the cover, but the name, and reputation of the author. The cover is really only to keep off the dust, and what has a person's private and personal life got to do with the quality of their artistic works? If that has anything to do with how we choose what we read or see, then we are going to have to throw out an awful lot of very inspiring work. Thank you for your crystal clear insight Richard, By the way I loved both of your films GA & BC Bill Willson, bmdblu2@atbi.com http://www.laterdaybard.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 13:23:54 -0400 From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] DN: Entrepreneur Makes a Good LDS Living The scary thing for me is that I'm on his list about 4 times with different addresses and never subscribed once. My e-mail lists have been added to his list twice, causing massive, self-generating e-mail loops that generated thousands of e-mail messages an hour. The question I have is: How has Kennedy been so successful in getting 180,000 subscribers to his e-mail lists? Is there a connection between that fact and my address showing up on his list regularly and without permission? Kent At 2:42 PM -0700 4/3/03, you wrote: >Entrepreneur makes a good LDS Living >By Dennis Romboy >Deseret News staff writer > > PROVO - Matt Kennedy is (LDS) living large. > Some 180,000 subscribers receive daily e-mail from his Web site, >ldsliving.com. As many as 7,000 customers a month order books, videos, CDs, >software and jewelry from the site. More than 10,000 subscribe to his >fledgling magazine, LDS Living. Another 8,000 have e-mail addresses from his >new ISP ending in @ldsliving.com. And thousands of morning television >channel surfers might soon click across a new program, LDS Living. - -- Subscribe to Mormon email lists: Send command to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Mormon-Index subscribe mormon-index Mormon-News subscribe mormon-news Mormon-Humor subscribe mormon-humor LDSClerks subscribe ldsclerks LDSPrimary subscribe ldsprimary See http://www.MormonsToday.com/mormon-lists/ for more information. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 13:24:57 -0400 From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: RE: [AML] Sugar Beet Readership As I mentioned before, this is a FICTION. There isn't any concentration in Virginia. Its simply that all AOL subscribers appear to be in Virginia because of the way the Internet works. Kent At 10:44 AM -0500 4/3/03, you wrote: >Clearly these results show that the farther away from Utah you are >the more likely you are to like The Sugar Beet's type of humor. I >laugh like crazy at some of it and am a bit offended by some, which >is only right because Arkansas is about half way to the east coast. >(It couldn't be that those Virginians are really working in D.C. and >come into contact with lots of different folks who infect them with >all sorts of "funny" ideas.) > >Cathryn Lane > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > - -- Subscribe to Mormon email lists: Send command to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Mormon-Index subscribe mormon-index Mormon-News subscribe mormon-news Mormon-Humor subscribe mormon-humor LDSClerks subscribe ldsclerks LDSPrimary subscribe ldsprimary See http://www.MormonsToday.com/mormon-lists/ for more information. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 13:55:06 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Conservative Literary Theory? - ---Original Message From: Nan McCulloch >=20 > P. J. O'Rourke does make good arguments and is funny. Have=20 > you read any of Jonah Goldberg's funny stuff? He writes for=20 > National Review, as well. Oooo. I can't identify Goldberg's stuff off the top of my head, but = that reminds me of Dennis Praeger who deserves a closer look. I find it interesting in general that some of the best conservative thought comes = from culturally Jewish authors. Particularly interesting when the general = Jewish cultural population tends to be much more liberal. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 14:14:24 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Dutcher Article - ---Original Message From: Thom Duncan >=20 > Fine article. But, Richard, I think your perception that=20 > "People don't hate Greeks like they hate Mormons" is a=20 > mis-perception. I don't believe we are hated. I just think=20 > we are misunderstood. We are perceived by the world at large=20 > to be people of a monolithic ideology and lifestyle. The=20 > fact that there isn't an organiztion on the planet, nor ever=20 > has been, where everyone thinks and acts exactly alike, seems=20 > to escape most observers. =20 >=20 > The work you and others do will go a long way to raise those=20 > misperceptions and, eventually, will help us to be better=20 > understood by the world at large.=20 See, that quote resonated with me for some very specific reasons. = Though I'm not sure what exactly Richard was saying, one thing I've noticed on returning to Salt Lake City after some time away is how *very* = antagonistic certain groups really are towards the church. It isn't just = mis-perception, much of our opposition hates us for things they understand very well. I don't think that there's a *general* hatred of Mormons in the wider population, but there *is* a significant portion of the wider culture = that is arraigned in direct opposition to us. Gay and lesbian activists, for example, truly do hate the church and would pull wide-spread = demonstrations against any LDS film that had *anything* to do with marriage. They'd = paint it as homophobic, anti-gay propaganda no matter what it had to say. = Even conservative gays like Andrew Sullivan have no kind thought for the = church as I know very well and, er, personally. And *then* you have those who define themselves in opposition to the church. What you'd get with a = "Big Fat Mormon Wedding" is so much commotion surrounding it that any message would have a tough time penetrating that commotion. Stories and = coverage about the movie would feel obligated to cover the "controversy" as much = as they would the actual film. This did not happen with "Greek Wedding" = and so the message we received was an overwhelmingly positive one. One = conducive to us going to the movie to see what everyone liked so much. Should this negativity prevent us from producing good art? Heck no, and = I don't think that's what Richard is saying. What I think he's saying is = much wiser--that we'd better be aware of those elements that hate us so and = take that into account in our expectations and planning for the public dissemination of our art. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 19:08:51 -0600 From: Clark Goble Subject: [AML] re: Conservative Literary Theory? I guess I'm still a little confused at what "conservative literary theory" is. I know there was a strong reaction amongst the left due to conservative use of postmodernism. We had a thread on that here last fall. The following link is a paper going through some of that. http://members.optushome.com.au/spainter/Postmodern.html Now I tend to cringe with such attacks since "postmodernism" is too vague a notion to be useful. Further deconstruction and other such things tend to get abused in literature to such an extent that it is hard to call what they do literary criticism. That isn't to deny real application of deconstruction or elements in "postmodernism." Further just as deconstruction devastated the neo-Marxists in France and elsewhere, it probably is having the same effect on those of a similar bent in the US. Hopefully this isn't what is meant by neo-conservativism though. I think few of the French making these criticisms of Freud or Marx could be considered conservative in any American sense of the term. Anyway, could someone perhaps clarify what it is exactly we are discussing? Onward to a few comments. ___ Jacob ___ | Conservativism isn't about blind adherence to tradition | and/or following historical precedence. It *is* about core | values and applying important traditional principals to new | and emerging circumstances. ___ Is this conservativism in the Bloom mold? i.e. that there are certain texts that were formative for our culture and that we ought to reinterpret *those* texts in light of present circumstances? Thus rather than focusing in on Joyce or Kafka as an analysis of modern life, we ought to reread Shakespeare though a modern lens? If this is what you mean then ends up offering many elements of critical legal hermeneutics to the more general literary community. After all in law we have to apply legal texts to new circumstances the authors may never have thought of. Yet because those texts are the "embodiment" of the community values they are what must be utilized to deal with new circumstances. The problem with Bloom's approach is probably highlighted by the parallel to law. While we certainly do have a literary "canon" we also pass new laws. Thus we have a situation very similar to law where we have old laws and new laws. While we ought not neglect old laws, neither do they gain precedence over new laws. The exception is with the constitution. However even there we have many amendments. One could well argue that perhaps literature ought to have some "critical canon." Yet that critical canon ought, like the constitution, be open ended. The debate then gets into what ought to be considered literary canon. Personally I think we ought to include Camus, Kafka, Hemmingway and others. (Joyce I'm more mixed about, if only because of the long background in philosophy and literature necessary to even be able to read him well) Perhaps that's not what you meant Jacob. Perhaps you meant that there is some "natural law" that ought to underlie both the "how" and "why" of our criticisms. ___ Jacob ___ | I'd claim Derrida, though conservatives would corrupt his | ideas by re-inserting some of the universalism he's | breaking down. In fact, that might be an interesting way | to define conservative literary theory. You could call it | neo-post-modernism--concerned with the distance separating | "other" while reaching out towards universal chaos-touched | themes of shared culture and identity. ___ I'm not quite sure what you mean by "universalism" here. However it certainly is possible to reformulate ones ideas even after the criticisms that certain strains of postmodernism have provided. There is, for example, a post-structuralist version of Freudeanism despite the devastating attacks on Freud that deconstructive readings provided. Same with Marxism, although what results has far less of a connection to Marx. I'd imagine the same could easily be true of neo-conservatism. (Assuming Alan's definition in terms of "natural law.") ___ Alan ___ | Political Conservatism, as defined by Geo Will, is an adherence | to principles of social and societal behaviors, also called | natural law. ___ Of course one big problem is that "natural law" is itself open to so many possible readings. Do we mean it in the sense of Aquinas? Of the Stoics? Or is it just an "intuition" based upon the structure of our evolved humanity? If the latter we end up in the odd position of considering Chomsky a neo-conservative. [Clark Goble] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 19:10:02 -0600 From: Clark Goble Subject: [AML] re: Conservative Literary Theory? ___ Alan ___ | Mormon theology is similarly based on eternal principles but not | necessarily part of this thread. ___ Mormon theology has some absolutes. But it also has a strong element of the "arbitrary" through all facets. There is typically no Mormon equivalent of "the best of all possible worlds" for instance. Mormonism adopts a very pragmatic approach to divine order. Thus we have for any particular decision, many possible ways it could have been conducted. To the degree that what you call neo-conservatives assume a "univocal" presentation of natural law then I think that natural law incompatible with Mormonism. Which is not to suggest I'm discounting natural law in Mormonism - far from it. I'm just suggesting that the notion of natural law found in conservative Catholicism and Protestantism is most probably incompatible. Although perhaps this is just suggesting that Mormonism adopts a deconstructed form of "natural law" and that we are the proud holders of true neo-conservativism. Or perhaps not. ___ Alan ___ | Levinas? But be careful there, we lefties have already claimed him. ___ Hmm. Given the positions of Levinas, is it possible to "claim him" in that fashion? After all if Levinas gives us a discourse of the Other as Other can we claim an Other without removing them as Other? Put an other way, can one claim the Other without doing violence to the Other? And if claiming is doing this sort of violence, how can one say one is following Levinas? The very act of claiming Levinas becomes the very act of denying Levinas. Clark Goble - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 13:15:34 -0600 From: katie@aros.net Subject: Re: [AML] Elizabeth Smart Quoting BJ Rowley : > > > > > >>PS-Is there any LDS fiction that deals with rape in our culture? > >> > > One of Anita Stansfield's books deals with date rape at BYU. I thought > it was very well written. (can't remember the title) After reading these > posts, I can't help but wonder if it's one of the ones that DB banned, > or if it's still on the shelf. Anybody know? It's _By Love and Grace_. To my knowledge, it has not been pulled from their shelves. Three of Stansfield's books have been, though, including _To Love Again_, which I posted a review of a couple of weeks ago. I thought the man was a pretty stereotypical abuser, but the woman's feelings afterward were portrayed well. - --Katie Parker - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 13:43:13 -0600 From: katie@aros.net Subject: [AML] Rape in Mormon Lit (was: Elizabeth Smart) Quoting Ben and Jessie Christensen : > PS-Is there any LDS fiction that deals with rape in our culture? You probably weren't expecting a huge discourse on the subject when you asked the question, but I wrote a column on the subject for AML-List several years ago. It never made it on the List, though, because it needed some polishing up. Shortly afterwards, AML-List discontinued all columns. So, hey, I'll just send it now. This is the unpolished version. The main problem it had before was that it was pretty lighthearted about such a serious subject. I want to say in advance that I do not wish to belittle anyone's pain or experience who may have had to deal with this awful thing in their own lives. Exactly who would commit such an act, and the repercussions in their lives and in the lives of the victims, is a complicated and tragic thing, and I hope that anyone who is struggling with such a problem will be able to find the healing that they so desperately need. Perhaps, even, you can speak up and share your story with others. I feel that our literature has come a long way, but we could use voices with deeper understanding of the subject. Also--there is a more complete review of Jack Weyland's _Brittany_ in the AML- List Review Archives. And this is by no means an exhaustive list of LDS novels on the subject. There may be others, though I'm not yet acquainted with them. ****************** Ravishing Men I currently own three LDS novels in which an act of rape occurs or almost occurs. (I did not do this on purpose.) Considering that LDS fiction has a reputation for artificial brightness, it's interesting that at least that many titles on this dark subject exist that have been produced by LDS publishers. Each of the books that I own gives some background on the would-be rapist, the "ravisher of women." Are these books trying to teach us something about what to watch out for? Jack Weyland's _Brittany_ definitely is, and perhaps the other two are too. At any rate, they each show us what a "ravisher of women" might be like. The first of these men is Danny, from Anita Stansfield's romance _By Love and Grace_ (Covenant, 1996). Here are the first descriptions that we get of Danny, through Sean (the hero) s eyes: <<<<<< Sean couldn't see this guy she was with at all, but halfway through the meal he started to get the impression they were arguing... Though he only caught disjointed words, it was evident the guy was trying to bully her into doing something she wasn't comfortable with. And the arrogant jerk wouldn't listen to anything she had to say. (p. 3) Sean spent the weekend speculating and stewing... He hated to think of her being on serious terms with this guy who had said things to her like, "You're a thoughtless, insensitive woman." And "You have no idea what you're talking about." The tone of his voice was clear in Sean's memory, and it made him angry. (p. 4) >>>>>> The depiction of Danny bothers me. On the one hand, he seems to be a decent guy in terms of appearance; at least, nothing amiss is reported. On the other hand, Stansfield is showing him to be an obviously rude and controlling person. The clincher for me is that he calls her things like "a thoughtless, insensitive woman" instead of more choice words that I won't mention. Would someone be willing to rape a woman but refuse to swear? even of the "he swore" variety? Well...maybe. Danny's character isn't deep enough to show why he might do that. And why has Tara (the heroine) gone out with him for so long if he treats her like this? This isn't the first time this has happened. She admits on page 9 that "there are times when I don't appreciate the way he treats me." Her explanation, "I've not gone out with anyone else for weeks...because I haven't been asked out by anyone worth going out with" (10) doesn't cut it. Why on earth does she feel that *Danny* is worth going out with? (She also mentions on page 9 that "we have fun together and he can make me laugh," but we never see any evidence of that.) The real reason is to facilitate the plot of the book, so she can have a history with Danny, have one date with Sean and have no guilt, have one more date with Danny and be attacked, and then have Sean ready and waiting to help her through the aftermath. It makes for a nice romance, but a cheap depiction of a rape and the motives and emotions that might have gone into the situation. The next ravishing man is Derek, from Jack Weyland's _Brittany_ (Deseret, 1997). In this book, sixteen-year-old Brittany goes out with Derek just to be nice, but the evening takes a disastrous turn that she must spend months to work through. Like Danny, Derek seems to have been deliberately given some bad characteristics. Space does not permit me to quote every passage containing Derek, but here are a few representative ones: <<<<<< He had big hands that often had either dirt or engine grease under the fingernails. His hair was longer than most boys in school. Brittany wouldn't have minded that, but he didn't take good care of it... (p. 28) He had kind of rough side to him that she didn't appreciate. Like the first day of class. Derek had tapped a boy next to him on the shoulder and showed him a nude figure of a woman in the textbook... (p. 29) >>>>>> Another example of Derek's bad side is on pages 29-30 when he tries to help Brittany cheat on a quiz. But here he almost innocently uses it for good, to help Brittany. He's actually shown to be a nice guy, with some rough edges: <<<<<< "I brought you something," he said, awkwardly thrusting a rose into her hand. "Thanks, Derek. That's real thoughtful of you." "No problem," he said. "I know girls like flowers." (p. 37) >>>>>> He also gives subtle signs of the directions his thoughts run, such as here after he watches Brittany perform in a school musical: <<<<<< "Good job, Brittany. I really enjoyed watching you prance around onstage." Brittany thought it was a strange thing to say. She would have expected him to say something about her voice or compliment her on her acting. (p. 37) >>>>>> And, in the actual Scene itself, he begins as charmingly as ever: "he came around behind the couch, she thought to watch her play Nintendo, but instead he bent over her and kissed her on the back of her neck" (p. 78). I do think that Weyland is heavy-handed in the bad characteristics that he gives to Derek. The way he presents them at times, especially the way he lists them on pages 28-30, is overbearing. It also bothers me that his personal grooming habits seem to be correlated to his moral standards. But in general, his flaws are well-chosen, and he has good characteristics as well. At times they all blend together and form a believable character, rather than a set of adjectives on two feet. He's never exactly appealing to Brittany, but he never seems like a terrible person before the assault, either. I think that's significant, and something worth pointing out to the youth who are supposed to be learning from this book: Little things that make you uncomfortable could be signs of bigger things. The third man is in _Run Away Home_, by Jennie Hansen (Covenant, 1993). Unlike the other two books, this is not a date rape story. This is a story of a grown woman, Megan, who was abused earlier in life by her alcoholic stepfather, Lee. Through several pages of flashbacks, we see that she had a very ugly childhood. Here's a description of Lee and how he treats Megan on her sixteenth birthday: <<<<<< Lee came into the kitchen where she sat nibbling on a stale doughnut. He stretched and scratched his belly where it protruded above his unsnapped jeans... "Happy birthday, baby," he whispered into her face, his foul breath making her want to retch. "I've got a surprise for my little girl. We're going on a picnic, just you and me." (p. 45) >>>>>> So far, Lee seems like a stereotypical alcoholic slob, but Hansen rounds out the picture as the story goes on. She goes on to describe Megan's mother's apparent indifference to the situation, and earlier tells how Megan, at age nine, was the primary caretaker of her baby brother Buddy because Lee and her mother didn't want to be bothered with him. <<<<<< Lee had driven all night. Megan held Buddy while he slept. His wet diaper soaked through her nightgown making it stick to her legs. When morning came Buddy cried for his bottle, but Lee wouldn't stop anywhere to buy milk for him. It was hot and Buddy was getting cranky when Lee finally stopped to buy gas for the car. Lee got a can of pop for Megan to put in Buddy's bottle. After that Buddy went back to sleep. (p. 39) >>>>>> It gets worse from here, but I won't spoil the story for anyone. Lee remains a nasty man with no redeeming qualities. Again, I find it troubling that this nasty man has to have nasty grooming habits; it could also be possible for him to be well-groomed. But in the context of the other awful things that he does, he's somewhat believable. So, we've seen three books where the "ravisher" is obvious to some degree. None of them paint exactly the same picture. Based on what these books tell us, a rapist is likely to have poor grooming habits, but not necessarily. He is likely to be openly rude most of the time, but not necessarily. He is likely to have obviously lower morals, but not necessarily. What the three books agree on is that the rapist is male, he is someone the woman already knows, and there are always warning signs that this guy means trouble. They may be vague enough that they don't worry a young woman, but to readers who know what will happen, they are like neon signs. So what about a book in which the rapist is unobvious, in which he (or she) is seemingly an upstanding Church member and completely trustworthy? I think this situation deserves exploration; not every would-be abuser will have Weyland's list of bad characteristics attached. Anita Stansfield addresses this somewhat in her book _Return to Love_ (Covenant, 1997). Here, Russell usually holds prominent positions at church and seems wonderful to ward members, but at home he beats his wife. He's pretty two-dimensional, though; he's all-good at church and all-bad at home. I think there is more that could be done on the subject. Perhaps even more important is to look at this at a slightly different angle. In each of the books that we've looked at, the young woman does not trust the man, at least not much. She may feel like he's okay to hang out with, but she doesn't trust him. What about women who do trust the man they're with, who might even be completely in love with him? This, too, is a situation that deserves to be addressed. Not that the books we've seen here are completely unrealistic. There are really people like Derek, who don't seem wonderful but do seem okay. There are really people like Lee, who are so far gone that they are plain awful. There are even really people like Danny, who look okay but really aren't very nice. But as we can see here, there can't be just one story about such physical abuse that will tell us all we need to know. Those who would do such a thing come in all shapes and sizes, with all kinds of backgrounds, motivations, feelings of remorse, and rationalizations. So do the victims. Each story is different. I'm not sure that we need a sudden flood of books on the subject, but I do think that we haven't yet said all that can or should be said. - --Katie Parker - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #12 *****************************