From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #72 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Wednesday, June 4 2003 Volume 02 : Number 072 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 20:53:11 -0500 From: "Kim Kimura" Subject: [AML] _Paint Your Wagon_ (Review) "Paint Your "Wagon" Starring Lee Marvin, Clint Eastwood and Jean Seberg Directed by Joshua Logan Written by Paddy Chayefsky, Alan Jay Lerner and Frederick Loewe Paramount. 1969 Reviewed by Kim Kimura, LDS Video Store "Paint Your Wagon" is the #1 LDS in box office history featuring a lead character openly identified in the movie as a Latter-day Saint.* "The Other Side of Heaven" is #2. After a successful Broadway run, Paramount spent an estimated $20 million to turn this production into a feature film. It was the 7th most successful movie released in 1969. It received an Academy Award nomination for Best Musical Score. Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood star as California prospectors. A town full of male prospectors force a Mormon man (John Mitchum) traveling through town to "sell" his second wife (Jean Seberg) to the highest bidder. Surprisingly, the strong-willed Latter-day Saint woman agrees to the idea, and ends up married to the rough-hewn prospector played by Lee Marvin. But while her husband is away from the town, Seberg falls in love with Eastwood and declares she would like both him and Marvin as her husbands. "Paint Your Wagon" was directed by non-Latter-day Saint director Joshua Logan, and remains one of his best loved films. Logan received Academy Award nominations for Best Director for "Sayonara" (1957) and "Picnic" (1955), and his film "Fanny" (1961) was nominated for Best Picture. He also directed such popular movies as "South Pacific" (1958), "Camelot" (1967) and "Bus Stop" (1956). The movie's male leads, Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood, are both Academy Award winners. Lead actress Jean Seberg, as the Latter-day Saint woman who marries them both, received nominations for BAFTA and Golden Globe awards. Now, be aware that this is not technically "LDS Cinema," because the filmmakers who made this movie were not Latter-day Saints and the movie wasn't made for a Latter-day Saint market. This is a big-budget Hollywood film made by non-LDS filmmakers. Despite the fact that Jean Seberg's character is a Latter-day Saint, there is little about her or about the movie as a whole that is particularly LDS, except for the plural marriage plot device. As a lead actress, Seberg is very much an admirable character and she exhibits high ideals. Mormonism is only mentioned by name in the scene where Seberg, her husband, and his first wife come into town; it isn't necessarily portrayed favorably, but nothing mean-spirited is intended by the portrayal either. Basically the hundreds of men in a mining town without women admire or are jealous or resentful of a man with TWO wives. The fact that the husband is willing to offer his wife to the highest bidder doesn't speak well of his character, but he at first flatly refuses the idea, and only agrees to it when Seberg pressures him to. She is clearly tired of her marriage and resentful of her husband's first wife. I thought these scenes were very funny and entertaining. There are some humorous lines such as "Brigham Young has 26 wives, and look at the trouble I'm having with just the two of you!" This is a period piece, set 150 years ago. None of it is intended as an attack on the Church, and I think most Church members would not be offended by the movie's Mormon-related content, which is actually a small portion of the overall film. Also be aware that the movie takes place almost entirely within a frontier town with somewhat earthy and definitely non-religious sensibilities. The rated earns its PG-13 rating, mostly for general thematic content. There is some mild language and some mild profanity. The film depicts no nudity, although after getting married to Lee Marvin, Jean Seberg's character is seen in a cleavage-revealing outfit. There are also two topless mannequins outside the saloon, carved out of wood but painted realistically. The mining town eventually expands and brings in more women, some of whom it employs as prostitutes. For me one of the most bothersome scenes is when Lee Marvin's character brings the twenty-something virgin son of a farming family to the room of a prostitute. Absolutely nothing is shown on screen, but it is quite clear what happens, and Marvin thinks arranging this was all in good fun. Fortunately for the overall moral tone of the movie, the characters played by Seberg and Eastwood are both outraged by Marvin's actions. In fact, Seberg immediately kicks Marvin (her husband) out of her home for doing this. "Paint Your Wagon" is a well-made, entertaining movie. But it should be watched for its own merits, not to learn anything about Latter-day Saints. The Church-related aspects are there mostly as a plot device. You would have to decide for yourself if Seberg's high ideals and beliefs, despite living in a ribald mining town, are a result of her maintaining her identity as a Latter-day Saint, or simply a reflection of a generally noble character. Also interesting is the question about whether her taking two husbands, in what she specifically refers to as "plural marriage," stems from beliefs as a Latter-day Saint, or from a willingness to abandon normal societal conventions for the sake of expediency. I enjoy "Paint Your Wagon," but be aware that it isn't necessarily a "family movie." 264 minutes / Color / Stereo / Region 1 DVD encoding / Widescreen Optional English subtitles for the hearing impaired. * "Paint Your Wagon" grossed $31.6 million at the U.S. box office, making it by far the most successful movie ever released featuring a lead character openly identified as a Latter-day Saint. "Ocean's Eleven" grossed far more (3 decades later), but the 2 characters identified as Mormons in the movie are not really lead characters, although they could be called 2 of the main characters, as they are two of the titular eleven. Also, their status as Mormons has no bearing on the plot. The religious affiliation of Jean Seberg's character in "Paint Your Wagon" is the central plot point. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 04:25:27 GMT From: "Jeffrey Needle" Subject: [AML] Diane WIRTH, _Parallels_ (Review) Review Title: Parallels - Mesoamerican and Ancient Middle Eastern Traditions Author: Diane E. Wirth Publisher: Stonecliff Publishing Year Published: 2003 Number of Pages: 211 Binding: Large paperback ISBN: 0-9602096-0-3 Price: $17.95 Reviewed by Jeffrey Needle Upon first hearing of this book from a friend at FARMS, I asked him whether he thought this kind of book would be beyond my ability to evaluate adequately. He assured me that it was indeed written at a level which I could understand. He was quite right. Wirth's book is a wonderful primer on a subject of so much discussion in Mormon circles -- the parallels (hence the title) between traditions found in the ancient Middle East and those known of the ancient tribes of Mesoamerica. Mind you, there's no shortage of books on this subject. The student wishing to learn can find a wide variety of such works. But Wirth's book is unique in two ways: 1) the work speaks to a non-Mormon audience -- there's hardly a mention of Mormonism anywhere except in the bibliographical endnotes; and 2) it serves well as a primer for those wanting to dip into the subject of ancient cultures and history, but are either unable, or unwilling, to devote the time needed to study the more weight tomes. The design of the book is very straightforward. Following some introductory thoughts, in which Wirth states her premises and lays out the design of her own thoughts, she treats the subject thematically, showing, through prose and illustration, parallels she perceives between the civilizations. In her opening words, she addresses directly the dispute between the "isolationist" and "diffusionist" schools of thought regarding the peopling of the American continent. It is beyond the scope of this review to explain this issue, other than to say that "isolationists" see a single source of population movement -- from the north -- accounting for the population of the continent, while the "diffusionist" sees the issue as more complex, involving more than one migration from more than one ancient civilization. It is clear that she comes down on the side of the diffusionists -- it is sensible that a believing Latter-day Saint would find the isolationist viewpoint unacceptable. The issue becomes, what does the evidence indicate? Can either side show definitively that one or the other theory is true? I don't think there is that kind of certainty. Wirth tries to show that the diffusionist theory is reasonable. The chapter titles are as follows: 1. Bearded Foreigners? 2. Osiris and Hun Hunahpu 3. Creation and Re-Creation 4. Fish Traditions 5. Symbolism in Genealogy 6. The King and the World Tree 7. Mesoamerican and Egyptian Scribes 8. Womb of Earth -- Womb of Sky 9. Mountain of Creation 10. Miscellaneous Parallels Each chapter centers around its theme by offering examples from both cultures and shows how parallels can be seen. Her attention to organization and detail is so helpful to the beginning learner. She opens each chapter with a brief introduction, and closes with a helpful summary of the data found therein. Using scripture, ancient writing, oral tradition and surviving symbology as her basis, Wirth takes the reader step by step through some of the more amazing parallels that exist between the civilizations. At the end of the book, the author supplies us with helpful comparative charts. Also arranged thematically, one may quickly research ideas and methods, and instantly find their parallels in the ancient civilizations. As one begins a study in this area, such charts are invaluable. And for the more ambitious student, a lengthy bibliography is supplied. It is important to note that Wirth does not assume a level of academic competence in her readers. Scholars may find the vernacular approach to be a bit put-offish, but most readers, I believe will find the common-sense approach to the subject both helpful and approachable. "Parallels" should be considered by any student wishing to either get started, or to more fully organize, a study of the subject. My bookshelf has many books on this topic; some are quite weighty and intimidating. This book fills a need in the current atmosphere of Mormon life -- the need for greater study versus the frantic pace of modern life that makes reading huge tomes impractical. This is a book that can be enjoyed at every level, and deserves a wide audience. Some may quarrel with the parallels presented, but no Latter-day Saint who cares about this issue (and all should!) can deny that resources are available. "Parallels" is an example of an entry-level book that is both competent and readable. Wirth is to be congratulated for taking the step of self-publishing. I hope that this book is eventually carried by Deseret Book and other independent LDS bookstores. I recommend it as a fine beginning text, and hope that it was wide circulation. Stonecliff Publishing is located at: P.O. Box 911060 St. George, UT 84791 435-652-8279 stonecliffpub@aol.com ----------------------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com jeffneedle@tns.net - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 15:12:33 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] R.S. Magazine - ---Original Message From: Gideon Burton >=20 > The Relief Society Magazine is awesome! What a treasure trove=20 > of LDS history, folklore, literature, etc. I'm glad Jacob=20 > mentioned it, and everyone should know about a new online=20 > resource that has indexed most of the R.S Magazine, including=20 > all of the birthdays and recipes (the latter sorted by=20 > category, even). This has been put together by Connie Lamb,=20 > one of the BYU librarians on the Mormon Literature Database=20 > committee. The URL is http://web.lib.byu.edu/rsmag/index.php.=20 > Soon we will be entering the many plays, poems, and literary=20 > lessons from the R.S. Magazine into the Mormon Literature Database. Cool. An index. Way awesome and I'm glad you posted that link. Any = plans to post the actual articles/poems/lessons etc.? I know that's = potentially a copyright nightmare, but it doesn't have to be. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 15:35:04 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: [AML] Restrictions on Being Alone (was: SSA in Mormon Lit) - ---Original Message From: Barbara Hume > At 10:30 AM 5/28/03 -0500, you wrote: > >(This, of course, is also an issue with the restrictions we place on=20 > >male-female interactions in the Church. I sometimes wonder=20 > whether the=20 > >positive value of guidelines such as "never give a ride to=20 > someone of=20 > >the opposite sex if you're married to someone else" isn't ultimately=20 > >negated by their potential to make us that much more aware of the=20 > >sexual potential of such situations. Which isn't to say that such=20 > >rules don't have their place...but I worry that applying them in an=20 > >across-the-board manner may have downsides that we don't often=20 > >acknowledge. Reducing opportunity while sexualizing context=20 > seems like=20 > >a short-term strategy to me.) >=20 > I think this guideline is insulting to men. It implies that=20 > they are all=20 > closet rapists and must never be given an opportunity to take=20 > advantage of=20 > a woman. It is so Victorian. If it's insulting, I think it's insulting to both men and women. I'm = not so sure it's insulting, though. I *do* think that you misread the = underlying purpose of the policy. I don't think it is to protect women from = rapists. I think it is to protect both from misunderstandings. I think it is to protect from developing a gradual partiality that could lead to = emotional attachment, falling in love and broken homes. And I think it is, in = extreme cases, to protect both from accusations (potentially false) of abuse = and/or infidelity. It's a conservative policy--protective of both men and women--and one = that I think needs to be broken from time to time, but only with understanding, careful thought and/or spiritual prompting. I consider it a guideline = and one that is necessary due to the fallen world we live in. It'd be = better if we didn't need it, if everyone would behave with honor and honesty at = all times, but we don't live in such a world and we should acknowledge that = by being careful in our conduct. In this case, the extra steps to adhere = to the policy are worth the effort because the stakes can be so very high = (even if relatively rare). It can take very little to break a family apart, particularly when accompanied by the additional stresses provided by = church and work. A vicious rumor that cannot be repudiated can have tragic consequences. And even if the effects aren't permanent, they can be = very damaging all the same. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 21:49:27 -0700 From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: re: [AML] SSA in Mormon Lit. Actually, a lot has been published on SSA in Mormondom--including Marybeth Raynes (Sp?) book, which title eludes me at the moment--something with "peculiar" in it. Obviously, Robert Hodson Van Wagoner's _Dancing Naked_. The already mentioned _Angels in America_. Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list Margaret Young ********************************************* "For 10 points, Wink . . . .": _Peculiar People: Mormons and Same-Sex Orientation_, edited by Ron Schow & Marybeth Raynes (foreword by Lowell L. Bennion), Signature Books, 1991, 373 pp. Travis Manning - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 00:10:29 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] D. Michael's Film Lab 4: EXPLORING RELIGIONS INFORMATION ON D. MICHAEL'S FILM LABS, INCLUDING A SCHEDULE FOR THE YEAR, CAN BE FOUND AT: http://www.wwno.com/filmlab ======= D. Michael's Film Lab No. 4 Saturday, June 14, 2003, in the Salt Lake area. "EXPLORING RELIGIONS" Religion, such a vital part of the human condition, often gets short shrift in Hollywood movies. For Lab #4, we'll view three exceptions to this rule: three films where a specific Christian religion is depicted with sensitivity and respect. We'll go from Amish to Greek Orthodox to Pentecostal with three great films. 3:00 pm - Witness Peter Weir, 1985 runtime 112 min R, some violence, brief nudity Harrison Ford as a cop with a dumb name (John Book) shows us he can act. A young Lukas Haas as an Amish boy traveling with his mother to visit relatives witnesses a murder, and Ford is on the case. But when Ford finds out that the murder was committed by a fellow cop, he realizes justice will not be served and the only thing that matters is saving the boy's life. He brings the mother and son back to their Amish village, and, passing out from a serious wound, remains there himself until he can recuperate. This film explores the clashing differences between the rustic, deeply religious Amish community and the cynical hard-nosed life of a big city cop, without once ever showing disrespect to any of the characters (well, except for the cookie-cutter crooked cop villains, but they don't count). 6:00 pm - My Big Fat Greek Wedding Joel Zwick, 2002 runtime 96 min PG, sensuality, language An endearing biographical love story about a Greek Orthodox girl who has a hard time fitting into the mold her family has planned for her. Rather than become a "married Greek baby factory," she wants to go to school and work with computers. The women of the family conspire to help her achieve her goals by manipulating the hardnosed father into thinking it all was his idea. But the aftermath of all this disturbs everybody as she falls in love with someone not of her faith, and -- horror of horrors! -- not Greek. This lighthearted portrait of a faith-based subculture in America has so many parallels to LDS culture that it's a must-see for every Mormon, who will be able to appreciate its humor and challenges in a way that many fellow Americans will not. 9:00 pm - The Apostle Robert Duvall, 1997 runtime 134 min PG-13, thematic elements, one brief scene of violence Robert Duvall directs and stars in this project dear to his heart, that he tried for years to bring to realization. Duvall is a Southern Pentecostal preacher who loves his calling to obsession. This drives his wife into the arms of another man whom in a desperate fit of passion Duvall clubs, accidentally killing him. He must flee his church, his community, and his family. He struggles with God to understand what has happened, and believes he receives forgiveness and a new calling as an apostle. He wanders, moved by the spirit, and comes across a Louisiana community where he starts a new church and reinvigorates a scattered flock. The Apostle is a masterpiece film recreating a religious culture that is prevalent in America, but misunderstood by many, especially among Mormons. It has the feel of authenticity, the power of genuine religious devotion, and a conversion scene with Billy Bob Thornton that should be a case study for any LDS storyteller. RULES OF ATTENDANCE: Because space is limited, please RSVP to dmichael@wwno.com. You will then receive directions for finding the location, which is in Sandy, Utah. You may attend any or all of the films. Discussion will follow the viewing of each film, analyzing and critiquing the merits and weaknesses and impact of the film from an artistic, cultural, and yes, even moral standpoint. No expertise is required to participate. Just a vocal opinion and a respect for the opinions of others. (Personal attacks will not be tolerated!) No admission is charged (this is just friends gathering to watch movies together), but we like to pool our resources and order out for something to eat, since it's a long time to go hungry! PLEASE be considerate of others and do not bring anyone who will not be interested in viewing the films or be disruptive in any way. Be honest with yourselves--if your kids are little hellions, leave them home! No babysitting facilities are available!! We don't want to enforce age requirements, but we will enforce considerate behavior. Also be aware that there will be no attempt to select films or maintain a discussion that is "family friendly" (unless the theme is specifically intended to be family friendly). Frankness (but not crudeness) is an acceptable part of the discussion. YOU are responsible for deciding if attendance is appropriate for any particular individual, not us. Everyone attends at their own risk. We ain't got no commercial liability insurance. This is just for fun. You are welcome to bring pillows or blankets or beanbags if you like casually relaxing on the floor. Dress is as casual as you want to get. Heck, you can come naked for all I care (but others may care). D. Michael is the final arbiter of all rules. Come join us! It's bound to be fun. - -- 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: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 09:39:11 -0700 From: thelairdjim Subject: Re: [AML] Narrative Choices So long as it's a soap opera, it doesn't matter what politics the actors pretend to. It tastes like a soap opera--melodrama all the way. The new Star Trek show and Smallville are morphing the same direction. I haven't watched the latest Star Trek since the "eugenics is GOOD!" episode, and after missing practically a season of Smallville I watched it again and I'm done with it too. West Wing is inherently a political lie, however. Compassion is entirely out of place in the current political left. It is merely a pose. But that is only the small part of the lie. The big part is the drama of Washington. It isn't dramatic--it's small, and mean, and brutal. Petty beyond the reach of contempt. There are very few decent people running the government, and they have very little power. Two of them happen to be from Arizona, which makes me happy--about forty reps in the House have started a tag-team filibuster-like parliamentary maneuver that has saved about $120 billion in pork over the past six-seven years. What they do is not dramatic, however. It's tactical and its very very dull. Inventing melodrama in Washington is just a propaganda method, and if the president depicted were based on an amalgam of Washington, Lincoln and TR, except wiser, I still wouldn't watch it. Soap opera is soap opera. The influence is always for the debit side of the soul. Jim Wilson aka The Laird Jim - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:19:12 -0600 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Horror - ---Original Message From: Clark Goble > The idea that all evil spirits can be dealt with in a "brief, even > perfunctory way" seems incorrect. At a minimum we have Matthew 17:21 > where Jesus say, "this kind goeth not out but by prayer and > fasting." > If the twelve apostles couldn't do it, I rather doubt I could do it > were I the first priesthood holder to arrive. Jacob Proffit wrote: Even if you don't consider it perfunctory, it isn't much to base an entire story on. Once rebuked, spirits stay gone. Any new encounter is just that, a new encounter with little or no continuity from previous events. LDS myth and theology would have to be stretched a bit thin to create a spiritual antagonist that persists enough to create something we'd call Horror. That's not really true. If you're going to stick to pure LDS myth and theology as it's been passed down I suppose it is. But that's not writing. That's typing. If you write a story that uses your own understanding of LDS myth and theology influenced by your own experience it very well could turn out to be LDS horror. The book I'm working on with American Book would be classified as LDS Horror, if you're in the third grade. If you're in the fourth grade it would be Magical Realism. It doesn't stretch LDS myth. If anything it gives weight to the darkest fears in the unique LDS perspective. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:21:59 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] Mormon Horror >-----Original Message----- >Even if you don't consider it perfunctory, it isn't much to >base an entire story on. Once rebuked, spirits stay gone. >Any new encounter is just that, a new encounter with little or >no continuity from previous events. LDS myth and theology >would have to be stretched a bit thin to create a spiritual >antagonist that persists enough to create something we'd call Horror. You're assuming that the Mormon audience would know much about the correct attitude of spirits. I suggest that they do not so that an imaginative author could make any version of this story work. I base my assumption on Mormon's not knowing their own theology on the popularity among LDS readers of the Tim LeHaye _Left Behind_ series of apocalyptic novels. Nary a single incident in any of those books comes even close to our teachings on the subject but most Mormon readers either don't know that or don't care. Thom - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:23:52 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] Role of Artists If I made a distinction between writers and poets, I did it by mistake. Sorry for the confusion. Thom - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:40:39 -0600 From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Mormon Horror ___ Jacob ___ | Even if you don't consider it perfunctory, it isn't much to | base an entire story on. Once rebuked, spirits stay gone. | Any new encounter is just that, a new encounter with little | or no continuity from previous events. LDS myth and theology | would have to be stretched a bit thin to create a spiritual | antagonist that persists enough to create something we'd call | Horror. ___ Well I think there are two components to this. The first is what the story is like. If you are looking for the traditional "haunting" story, then yes. There will be differences. But I don't think this entails there can't be a story. Simply that the story will take a different form from the more Catholic or Protestant inspired narratives. However even having said that I *don't* think that rebuked spirits simply disappear permanently. In those few cases I have fairly reliable knowledge it didn't work that way. (Including all the normal caveats due to my skeptical scientific nature) There was one story from early church history that illustrated this, but unfortunately I can't find the source right now and am too busy to look further. I guess I'll just say that I don't think your presentation correct. As I understand it a rebuke might free people from a particular event. You might even dedicate a house to prevent problems there. However in some cases the rebuke isn't permanent for a place, depending upon what activities are going on there. Likewise a rebuke doesn't guarantee the person to be free from future encounters, as we see in the life of Joseph Smith. I think I also pointed out the difference between the LDS conception of such things and Catholic views last week. The LDS view tends to see such forces as involved in a conspiracy. Perhaps the members of the "conspiracy" are weak and open to their own passions. But I think that does have implications for how one would tell the story. We really don't have the idea of dead evil humans haunting an area. (Although such stories do pop up in LDS folk stories - but the theological issues are more problematic) At best we have the tradition of evil sons of perdition utilizing such traditions for their own evil means. So yeah. The horror story won't be the typical story. It will involve something that is more of a chess game. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing though. And I have read stories of that sort before. I had mentioned the beginning of Hamlet last week as one way this can happen - a son of perdition whispering into someone's ear to cause problems, while pretending to be a loved one of that person. (In Hamlet's case his "dead father" as a devil telling him to get revenge for his death) Of course not being a fictional author, I'm probably not equipped to tell people what fiction is good. However I personally do think there are interesting stories of this sort. Indeed just the historical accounts are very, very interesting. Although admittedly a lot of people aren't as familiar with them. Even acknowledging that a lot of them involve perhaps exaggerated interpretations and the like, there really is a very interesting tradition of these stories. Especially during the time of Joseph Smith although there are plenty from Utah as well. [Clark Goble] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 11:58:53 -0600 From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Buffy and God? ___ Eugene ___ | I think, succumbing to the spotlight of sudden fame, Joseph | Campbell conned himself and George Lucas into believing that | _Stars Wars_ was more than it set out to be--and that explains | why all the episodes since the first two (the first two | produced, that is) have been so awful: Lucas wanted so badly | to be profound he forgot the basics of good storytelling that | he had intuitively grasped the first time around. ___ I actually think the third one had the strongest story of all three. Its problem was much more direction and then a few questionable art direction decisions. (i.e. the Ewoks) Had it had a different director though I think it could really have been quite well. It is true that Lucas started doing a kind of "writing by democracy" where he did polls and the like to try and find archetypes. However in doing this he imposed structure over the natural flow of a story to such an extent that there was little real story. I think with the last two a lot of problems were once again direction as well as just a lack of skill with writing. The biggest problem though is that "structures" are imposed on the story. I know structuralism was very popular in the mid 20th century, but if Lucas doesn't show its problems, I don't know what would. Structuralism tends to lose the heart of a story. ___ Eugene ___ | I believe that "popular art" exists in the first place because | the world works in a certain way. Drama and music work in | certain ways (referring now to Scott Parkin's point), and more | often than not don't work when those rules are abused. You could | call it the cosmic anthropic principle, or you could call it | social conditioning. Joseph Campbell saw these patterns arising | out of the big bang of cultural evolution. ___ While Campbell certainly adopted structuralism of the Levi-Strauss sort, he also adopted the kind of psychological structuralism of Freud and Jung. As such he was actually rather typical of the whole "mythic interpretation movement." I think Eliadi was a much better scholar of that genre, and more careful as well. Campbell tended to come up with structures and then make stories fit his structures. As such he often distorted them or downplayed the differences far too much. I think these approaches are interesting. We can see this general approach to texts in Mormon figures like Hugh Nibley. While I think Nibley avoids some of the problems that Campbell runs into, due to his belief in revelation, there still are problems. [Clark Goble] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 13:40:29 -0600 From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Narrative Choices As I recall it, Bartlett's lie almost costs him an election, but he ends = up winning anyway. With Sorkin leaving, the focus supposedly will be on the personal lives = of the characters. More soap, in other words. Jury's out, of course, = on whether or not this is a good idea. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 14:03:36 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] (S.L. Trib) NELSON, LEE, _Huck Finn_ Nelson Massacres the Book Twain Tried to Destroy By Martin Naparsteck Special to The Tribune Huck Finn & Tom Sawyer Among the Indians By Mark Twain and Lee Nelson; Council Press; $18.95 Utah author Lee Nelson says he has "finished" an incomplete novel by Mark Twain, Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer Among the Indians. He also says, in an author's note, that "I do not presume to know how Mark Twain wanted to finish the story." On the first count he is wrong, which proves that on the second he is right. He has not finished Twain's incomplete novel; rather, he has written a separate novel in which he misrepresents Twain's world view, alters the characters of Huck and the slave Jim to the point of gross distortion, and concocts a plot that, if he believed in truth in advertising, should have led him to retitle the book Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer Among the Mormons. Twain published The Adventures of Tom Sawyer in 1876 and the far superior The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn in 1884. In 1885 he wrote, according to his autobiography, 36,000 words of another novel, narrated by Huck and with Tom and Jim as "heroes." He wrote, also, that he "destroyed" the manuscript "for fear I might some day finish it." He adds, "I believed that that trio had done work enough in this world and were entitled to a permanent rest." (Actually, Tom and Huck would return in two lesser novels published in the mid-1890s, Tom Sawyer Abroad and Tom Sawyer Detective.) Among the Indians has been published before. A Twain manuscript with 16,000 words survived the author's destructive intent, and Life magazine published it in 1968. The University of California Press has an edition in print. It can be found easily, for free, online. Nelson (best-known for The Storm Testament, and part owner of the company that published his novel) has kept the Twain part intact: the first 56 pages, when Indians kill most members of a white family heading West and kidnap the two survivors, teenage Peggy and her little sister Flaxy. Huck and Tom set out to free them. Tom's view of Indians is key to understanding Twain's direction. A typical example: "They're the noblest human beings that's ever been in the world. If a white man tells you a thing, do you know it's true? No, you don't; because generally it's a lie. But if an Injun tells you a thing, you can bet on it every time for the petrified fact; because you can't get an Injun to lie." When the Indians in Twain's tales lie, murder, and presumably rape, and Huck challenges his view, Tom says he learned about Indians by reading novels by James Fenimore Cooper. In a famous essay, "The Literary Offense of Fenimore Cooper" (1895), Twain writes that Cooper violates "114 offenses against literary art out of a possible 115." Among the Indians is clearly an earlier attack on Cooper's habit of creating cartoonish characters who perform impossible deeds. It is a counterbalance to the silliness of characterization and plot that dominated Cooper's writing. Twain was among our greatest writers, Cooper among our silliest. Nelson, sadly, learned to write by imitating Cooper, not Twain. In his part (four times as long as Twain's), Peggy is repeatedly raped, first by the Indians, then by white traders. She becomes pregnant, has a miscarriage, falls in love with Huck and marries him. Jim is captured by Indians, who treat him better than whites ever did. Huck, who far more than Tom is the hero of this book, meets Porter Rockwell and Bill Hickman, Mormon gunslingers, whom he describes as Cooper-style heroes. At one point, soldiers quiver in fear at the mere sight of Hickman and Rockwell; it's a scene similar to one in Zane Grey's Riders of the Purple Sage, in which the Mormon-hating Lassiter frightens Mormons about to whip an innocent man just by showing up. It's a silly scene in Grey's book and just as bad in Nelson's. It is a scene unlike anything Twain ever wrote, the type of scene Twain ridiculed in his essay. The portrayals of Hickman and Rockwell and the constant praise for Brigham Young (who does not appear in the novel) make Nelson's part of the novel seem church-sanctioned. Tom Sawyer reads and enjoys the Book of Mormon. Although most of the story takes place in 1857-58, during the so-called Mormon War, there is not a single mention of the 1857 Mountain Meadows Massacre, in which Mormons murdered more than 100 members of a wagon train. Twain wrote about the massacre in an appendix to Roughing It (1872). In that travel book, he also devoted several chapters to making fun of Mormons (example: He always thought polygamy was a great evil until he visited Salt Lake City and saw what Mormon women looked like). Twain's Among the Indians was a criticism of Cooper. Nelson's is faith-promoting drivel. Twain deserves better. ----- Martin Naparsteck reviews books from and about the West for The Salt Lake Tribune. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #72 *****************************