From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #88 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, June 19 2003 Volume 02 : Number 088 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 09:32:17 -0600 From: "Elizabeth Walters" Subject: Re: [AML] Restrictions on Being Alone The last thing you want from a church leader is someone who lays down guidelines based on reactions instead of proactions or saying these things out of emotion and not spiritual reasoning. It's like the short-fused teacher who punishes the entire class because of the misbehavior of one kid. I can understand the logic behind such guidelines where you're just trying to get to the root of the problem and eliminate it, but it's somewhat of a flawed method if you're shooting at the root without really knowing where the root is. There's no one way to prevent these incidents from happening. Every situation is different, every environment is different, and every person is different. Not even Dr.Ruth can predict how the stars and planets will align to make an adulterous affair take place. With the analogy of sunscreen, lathering that on won't automatically prevent you from getting cancer. There are way too many factors involved such as the type lotion you have and what SPF level it is, where you're living (a lot of the U.S stuff won't do much good in Austrailia where UV levels are higher), how long you're in the sun, etc. This is the same with the whole being alone issue. It doesn't become a problem unless you allow it to. It's my observation that in most cases, people fall into temptation more so because what they weren't doing as opposed to what they were doing. If a person isn't living a good life, going to the temple and church, being a good Mormon in general, striving to improve their marriage then it doesn't matter what restrictions are placed. That serpent will keep biting your ankle until you stomp his head. In literature there are several books out there that address these issues in an indirect way. I always find it interesting that many LDS people scoff at the mere mention of The Bridges of Madison County, but at the same time enjoy movies like, "It Could Happen to you" to the point of finding it on their top 10 "date flick" list. Both stories deal with likeable protagonists who start off very faithful to their spouses, but eventually choose to have extramarital affairs. The difference is one story ends "tragically" and the other "happily." Which movie is which depends on the viewer. The one thing both stories have in common is that the protoganist' first meeting with their "lover" starts off quite innocently, but both main characters are confronted with strained marriages and lots of free time on their hands. Although both protagonists fall to adultery, they both have several opportunities during the course of the story to squash the serpent, but choose not to for different reasons. My point in these examples is that the solution to preventing infidelity is never as simple as saying no to giving a ride to another sister or brother in the gospel. It's more art than science if you pardon the clich'e. Elizabeth Walters - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:39:24 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] Mormonism and Feminism At 11:06 AM 6/17/03 -0600, you wrote: >I believe that men often make this mistake in communicating to women as=20 >if women are men--there *is* a very, compelling, objective reason to=20 >make the distinction. Women make the same mistake in treating men the way we like to be treated,=20 and in wondering what's wrong with them when they don't behave as we do. We=20 need to learn all we can about the hard-wired and societally induced=20 differences. The lit connection is that when we write characters of the=20 opposite gender, we want to get them right. barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 13:37:33 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] Re: Restrictions on Being Alone >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com >[mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of David=20 >and Dianna Graham > If you are a bishop and have to listen to=20 >confession upon confession year after year about adultery,=20 >fornication, masturbation, bestiality, etc., I think it would=20 >be very difficult to not passionately cry from the pulpit,=20 >"Don't even flirt with temptation! Just play it very safe." =20 This is a temptation that a Bishop should avoid -- generalizing from the specific to the general. Not only that, but a Bishop may not have enough training to tell if act (a) is a cause of sin (b). Two spiritually healthy people in a car alone would have no problems. But an emotionally immature couple might. By focusing on the act of being alone, the Bishop is generalizing and might fail to focus on the real problem, the two people's emotional lives. =20 Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:56:38 -0600 From: Marny Parkin Subject: RE: [AML] Mormon SF Bibliography >May I make a suggestion? When I went to the link for the review of=20 >Linda Adams' "Prodigal Journey," found it went to a single review of=20 >the book, when in fact there are three reviews, and there is a link to=20 >the list of the three reviews. Would it be more helpful to go to >*that* page instead of the single review? That's a good suggestion. I believe when I put the link in=20 originally, there was only one review. It has been a while since I've=20 updated the reviews, so I'll take your suggestion into account for=20 all the AML-List reviews. Thanks, Marny [Parkin] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:49:43 EDT From: JanaRiess@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] William F. BUCKLEY, _Getting it Right_ In a message dated 6/19/03 1:01:52 AM,=20 owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com writes: >Buckley's Mormon protagonist is the good guy. He considers himself a >faithful Mormon (whatever that is) even though he drinks and fornicates=20 >through the novel (although he refuses to use cuss words.) There is a >tradition in fiction about Catholics something called a "whiskey=20 >priest" (especially in the novels of Graham Greene, i.e. "The Power and=20 >the >Glory".) If I understand correctly, such a priest can be dissolute, >even alcoholic. He is torn by doubts. But because he is still a priest >conferred with the authority of God, God can work through him and he >is still good for a miracle every once in a while. Such an understanding >of sin and authority might have influenced Buckley's thinking about the >personal morality of his Mormon characters. =20 This is a very interesting perspective. I have read Buckley's spiritual=20 autobiography (NEARER, MY GOD), most of which is actually a doctrinal debate and=20 not a memoir, and I am intrigued by this idea that his view of what is permissible for his Mormon protagonist is influenced by the fact that he is so steeped=20 in Catholicism. One of the great medieval debates was whether the Eucharist could be defiled=20 if the priest were unworthy to administer it. Greene's THE POWER AND THE=20 GLORY, which is the best Catholic novel I have ever read, handles this issue so=20 beautifully. But you're quite right about Buckley's understanding not being an=20 accurate portrayal of Mormon belief and practice. Jana Riess - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:08:53 -0600 (MDT) From: ben@parkinsonfamily.org Subject: [AML] Bookbinding Folks, Here are some notes on my bookbinding adventures. (I wish I had time to d=3D o a series on this--I=3D92m finding it a fascinating process.) I=3D92m sure th=3D is will seem confusing to most, but maybe it will = help any of you who are interested in trying the same thing, and those who have already done it can see what I=3D92m doing wrong and give me pointers. I typeset my books in Microsoft Publisher. This is not a great program bu=3D t I find it has one huge advantage over word processors such as Word or WordPerfect--when you situate a picture or text box, it stays there even if you insert or delete text above it. This has saved me endless grief. I have discovered also Windows=3D92s dirty little secret, and why all graphic artists and typesetters everywhere use Macs. Every time you try to print to a new printer, you get reflow--things you put on one page may end up o=3D n a different page or disappear entirely. Since Mac has the Postscript page description language built in, in theory you should be able to print to any printer a Mac will print to without reflow. Microsoft Publisher doesn't quite solve this, so I typeset to my home printer and then create PDFs to print on other printers. On the advice of a graphics artist who works in our shop, I scan all the images for the books I do at 300 dpi. This is the resolution used by both the photo and book printing industries, though they sometimes downsample to around 240 dpi at print time. If you want to enlarge a photo, you have to scan it at higher res (1 inch square at 600 dpi has the exact same number of pixels as 2 inches square at 300 dpi). I use TIFF format, also pretty well an industry standard, because JPEG creates distortion. I find when I=3D92m scanning for output to a laser printer I need to scan just a little light, as things print darker than they look onscreen--anyway it=3D92=3D s easier to add contrast than to take it out. For my first book I used line art and old Dover engravings from one of the electronic clipart collections. I found they print beautifully on laser printers even at lower resolutions. It=3D92s almost hard to do a bad job with this kind of art--just watch for moire patterns if there=3D92s any cross-hatching. The format for my test book I got from Chris Bigelow--you just take a piece of legal paper and fold it in half. If you crop the end opposite th=3D e fold, you wind up with a book that=3D92s not too far from = standard paperbac=3D k sizes, or you can leave it wide and squeeze more words on it. The biggest advantage to this size may be that you can print them on a low-end home laser printer. If you want to go to a more standard book size, you have t=3D o print on ledger (11x17) and trim it down. The copy shop where I work give=3D s employees excellent prices--it comes out to about 6 cents a sheet for legal or ledger printed on both sides. Since you=3D92re folding it and creating four pages from each sheet of paper, that=3D92s only 1 1/2 cents p=3D er printed page. They print on a DocuTech-style machine that uses toner like a laser printer or a photocopier but is high enough quality that it=3D92s u=3D sed in = most all kinds of commercial printing now. The machine will collate, fold, etc., even put on a binding, but not one good enough for what I=3D92m after. Most any corner copy shop has this kind of machine--maybe not quit=3D e at these prices, but still pretty cheap. I imagine most anyone could have a 500-page book printed for $10 (paper and printing) in quantities as low as 1. After I typeset I convert to PDF (no more reflow, and the format is robus=3D t enough for the highest-end printers that book publishers use). The DocuTech-style machines will collate into signatures automatically (so when you fold a stack of sheets, the printed pages come out in the right order), but I prefer to do the collating myself so I can print extra copies on my home laser printer if I need to. This is a little complicate=3D d until you get the hang of it. You set up your signature so it=3D92s printin=3D g two pages per side on 8 = sheets of legal paper in landscape mode (32 pages per signature). In your desktop publishing software you see 16 sides, one after the other. Page 1 of a given signature goes on the right-hand side of the first sheet, page 2 on the left side of the second sheet, page 3 o=3D n the right side of the third sheet and so on. When you get to the end you start over backwards: pages 15 and 16 are together on the sixteenth sheet=3D , page 17 goes to the empty space on the fifteenth sheet, page 18 on the empty space on the fourteenth sheet, and so on to page 32, on the left-hand side of the first sheet. If you lay this out on your screen wit=3D h all pages visible and show the flow arrows, they criss-cross, like your shoe laces. (Quark will do this. You can=3D92t do it in Microsoft Publisher=3D , but if you could, that=3D92s what = you=3D92d see.) I=3D92ve had books perfect bound, which is cheaper than cloth binding but still pretty expensive in small editions (say, 20 copies of a family history). Also, no matter how good a job they do, you get the feeling tha=3D t this book can only be read a couple of times, which means that 100 years from now, the only people who will have it are descendants of people who didn=3D92t like it well enough to read it in the first place. This type of binding does not look like it will hold up to photocopying at all. I=3D92d =3D say the newer spiral binding = would be more permanent and allow for photocopying, but then you wind up with a book that doesn=3D92t look like i=3D t will hold up in a backpack or on a bookshelf, at least a bookshelf that gets any use. Also I=3D92ve long had the suspicion that people are more lik=3D ely to preserve a book that looks professional when they go to closet-cleaning. In the case of family histories, it=3D92s often the childr=3D en of those who bought the book who do the closet-cleaning, and they may hav=3D e no sentimental attachment to the book at all. These are the consideration=3D s that led me to want to learn to sew and bind my own small editions. I bought a book by Arthur William Lewis called _Basic Bookbinding_, Dover Publications (May 1985), ISBN: 0486201694, $6.95 at Amazon. It was writte=3D n originally in the =3D9150s, and describes a style of binding with a rounded back that is not very common nowadays. I didn=3D92t find Lewis=3D92s explanat=3D ions clear and couldn=3D92t see = the reason for a lot of what he did beyond it wa=3D s done that way in the trade in days gone by. Paris and Cathryn on this lis=3D t recommended Aldren A. Watson=3D92s _Hand Bookbinding: A Manual of Instruction_, paperback, 160 pages, Dover Publications (August 1996), 048629157X, $8.76 at Amazon. I picked it up and found it a lot more helpful. His procedures and illustrations are very clear and more in line with current methods and materials (though still slightly dated--have the rest of you noticed how thoroughly the material world has changed since the 1980s?). But he also strikes me as clearer on theory, so if you want to depart from his procedure, you=3D92re on safer ground. From my point of view, this book is so immensely more helpful than the first that it=3D92s a wonder they both come from the same publisher. My wife Robin and I made our first book from misprints from my laser printer, most of them from trying to get the signatures to print correctly. We knew this would make for a funny book, with all the repeate=3D d and off-center and out-of-order pages, but we figured we=3D92d make enough mistakes in binding that it would be a useless book anyway. We divided th=3D e book into five 8-sheet signatures, folded them using a bone folding tool we got at an art supply store, sewed them with carpet thread without usin=3D g a frame, just to see how much one was needed. We glued on twill tapes and a muslin mull from the local fabric store using Sobo glue. It came out looking alright, as far as it went. I trimmed it on a book cutter we have at work to get the edges straight. One edge I chopped way too close to th=3D e type, and I had trouble getting the whole thing square. We used a piece o=3D f linen (I think it was) from the fabric store for book cloth. The design w=3D e applied using an iron-on T-shirt transfer that we ran through our old 300 dpi inkjet printer. The resulting pattern looked decent but not nearly as good as that printer does on paper. I think you could make it look a lot better with a newer, higher-resolution inkjet printer. But the transfer went on as a soft, almost waxy film that I doubt will prove very durable. We talked a lot about how to get sizing in the fabric--I think we wound u=3D p using a spray acrylic after the fact. We live right by Weber State University campus and so raided the print shop=3D92s recycling bin for some nice glossy sheets to use as endpapers, and got some matte board for book boards from the bookstore. When we went to glue it all together, we saw we=3D92d gotten the front and back cover transfers too far apart on the clo=3D th, and worse, we=3D92d put the front cover on the left rather than the right, which might work for the Japanese but is pretty confusing for books written in a Roman alphabet. We had significant trouble with wrinkling also when we glued down the end papers. At first glance you=3D92d think, that book doesn=3D92t look half bad. = But onc=3D e you came a little closer than 50 paces and wiped the Vaseline off your glasse=3D s and actually looked at the thing, you=3D92d see its = a pretty comical-lookin=3D g book, with the front cover on the back, all of it off center, the pages scallywompus. But we got what we needed from it, a sense of how the parts fit together, how big to cut the boards, how to trim the corners of the cloth to get a nice fold, etc. So we started on a new one. This time I used cotton threads to sew, and I kept wondering whether this was a mistake--would they snap or otherwise make the book weaker? It occurred to me carpet thread might weaken the book in a different way if over time it sliced through the paper. I made an ersatz frame this time b=3D y using masking tape to suspend the twill tapes between two rungs of some built-in shelving on one of our walls. I used white muslin for the mull this time thinking it might not show as much. I got it fairly square, but when I tied it off at the end I pulled it too tight, which warped it a little. This time we used wheat paste, which we made by stirring common white flour into water and boiling it till it thickens. Our paste had the consistency of gravy, and if you got it on lumpy it wrinkled the paper, s=3D o I started to stir it and then pick a spot that was a little thinner and dip my brush in there. It was not tacky at all, so you had to weight everything until it started to dry. In spite of this, I really liked this glue while we were using it. It seemed to bind well, if you overpasted it didn=3D92t show, and cleanup was incredibly easy. We kept thinking of different schemes to print the cover cloth and finall=3D y got the idea of using cloth on the spine only and art paper (such as Canson paper) for the front and back boards. (I think this is called library binding or half-binding.) We investigated inkjet printers and decided to buy the new Epson C82, which has long-lasting inks, very good resolution (1400 I think), a sheet-feeder that will handle stiffer papers=3D , and a low enough sticker price (under $100) that if we busted the sheet feeder putting through heavy papers, we might actually consider buying another one. Now we can use photos on our cover designs (I=3D92m a lot hand=3D ier retouching a photo than designing from scratch), and we can print the papers at home. No need for a special printer that will handle wide paper formats, because even if I=3D92m making an 8 1/2 x 11 book, the cloth from =3D the spine comes out about 1 1/2 inches on each side, so all we have to do is cut the art paper down to legal size, run the front and back pieces through the Epson, and we=3D92re able to cover everything. We were much more careful trimming the edges this time but still had trouble keeping it square. As a workaround, we attached the boards separately before gluing on the paper and cloth to the boards, tracing th=3D e outline of the book onto the matte board scraps so they would be a unifor=3D m width from the edge of the pages, even if not totally square. We had trouble with the linen spine piece fraying, but Robin suggested that next time we try some stuff that keeps the ends of cloth from unraveling and thinks that will solve the problem. We were a lot more careful applying the end papers, but they still wrinkled a little (a lot less than before)=3D , and the muslin mull and tapes show through. The finished book looked beautiful, but we discovered water from the whea=3D t paste had leaked into the spine and wrinkled the pages near the stitching=3D , so they don=3D92t turn smoothly. Then I noticed that the art paper was separating a little from the cloth in one place, and before long that bubble expanded to about 4 inches by 8 inches. The covers bowed too--I=3D92=3D m not sure why they didn=3D92t the first = time, but I have to suspect the wate=3D r in that wheat paste once again. We gave the book to my 8-year-old daughte=3D r to read, and she=3D92s had = it a week. The cover papers have separated furth=3D er, but when she spilled jam on the cover it cleaned up easily. I=3D92m ready to go at it again. We=3D92ll probably try Elmers glue next or g=3D o back to Sobo. I may use Davies board instead of matte, or I may give matt=3D e one more try using the commercial glue. We=3D92ll likely also try using a commercial mull or maybe even some cheesecloth, something that=3D92s a litt=3D le thinner and less likely = to show through the end papers. We may also try some of the commercial book tape, which I think is thinner, but Robin thinks is thicker than the common cotton twill we=3D92ve been using. We sti=3D ll have the problem of printing the spine. I=3D92ve considered using paper the=3D re too but can=3D92t come up with a color scheme that works. I thought if you =3D had light papers for the boards and then did the spine in navy blue or maroon=3D , that would look pretty good, but inkjet printers don=3D92t exactly print white. The graphic artist at work suggested if we use cloth that we silkscreen the spine using an enamel ink (rather than the textile inks they use on t-shirts, which are washable but soft like that t-shirt transfer, and who wants to wash a book anyway). Setup for that would likely be around $30 or $40 per book, but he says the screens last a long time, so maybe you could do one and keep it around in case other family members decide they want copies of the book later. Ben Parkinson Ogden, Utah, USA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 03 11:02:04 -0600 From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Director Announced for _Baptists at Our Barbecue_ Preston announced this new movie. A brief response. Any time a new film based on a favorite LDS novel is announced, it's good news, and any Christian Vuissa film is also good news. This is a very fun novel, and would make a fun movie. And you're certainly right about Christian's abilities as a filmmaker. I do have one tiny reservation about the project. I know Christian well, and was one of his faculty advisors for Roots and Wings, which I strongly recommended for last year's AML award. Christian is a very talented filmmaker, and a good friend. What I don't know is, can he do comedy? I have some reservations. Christian is a very serious guy. He can do thoughtful, intelligent, serious work. But comedy is about timing, and I don't know if he can pull it off. I mean, not everyone can do everything, right? I just saw the atrocious re-make of The In-laws. The original In-laws, with Peter Falk and Alan Arkin, is slapdash and ugly, and also one of the funniest movies ever made. The new one has much better production values. And it's also got Michael Douglas trying to be funny. Wonderful actor, great producer, he just isn't up to comedy. So this is an interesting issue for the list, actually. Fact is, comedy is HARD. It's harder than almost anything else. And we all have our own gifts. I would completely love to be proven wrong here. Nothing would please me more than to see a terrific film made from Baptists, and nothing would be please me more than to see Christian have a commercial success. I'm rooting for the project. With fingers crossed. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 11:08:02 -0600 From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] _Paint Your Wagon_ (Review) Let me quickly add that I do indeed know who Harve Presnell is. When I wrote 'then this guy we've never heard of' sings They Call The Wind Maria, I expressed myself poorly. What I meant was, Harve Presnell plays a character who, at that moment, was a nonentity, and who went back to being one after the song. So this guy just shows up, basically to sing one song. And it's a lovely tune, and he sings it well; he always did have a wonderful voice. It's also an idiotic moment in the film, but that's hardly Presnell's fault. Besides, here are the lyrics, best I can remember them: Away out here, they've got a name, for rain and wind and fire The rain is Tess, the fire Joel, and they call the wind Maria. (Muh RYE uh) I mean, talk about someone left the cake out in the rain. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 03 11:31:02 -0600 From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Mormon Actress If Eliza Dushku is among our more important actresses--and she's not a tenth the actress Mireille Enos is--then surely Aaron Eckhart is our most important current actor. Also less-active, unfortunately, but a fine actor and borderline movie star. About which, let me say that it surprises me that we haven't talked about the Core. This seems to me quite an important movie, in this sense; it's the movie that could make Aaron a movie star. I mean, a big star, a major bankable star, a Harrison Ford or Mel Gibson. Interesting phenomenon; to become a star, you don't do great work in little pictures. You do a Big Dumb Action film. Bruce Willis isn't a star because of Twelve Monkeys, he's a star because of Die Hard. If you can carry a BDAF, you're a star. So that's what the Core is, a BDAF, and as such, it's pretty good. It got some vitriolic critical response, which you should ignore. See the darn thing; it's entertaining. Frankly, I liked the heck out of the Core, considering how silly it is. Let me put it this way; they go out of their way to make the whole thing plausible. Everything about it is sensible and carefully thought-through, except for all of it. I said that badly. The Core of the Earth isn't going to stop spinning. If it did, there'd be nothing we could do about it. Aside from that, though, setting that aside, if the Core DID stop spinning, and if there WERE something we could do about it, what this movie proposes doesn't seem grossly implausible. You REALLY have to SUSPEND ye ol' disbelief, but once you've done that, the thing has its pleasures. And Aaron Eckhart is very good in it. He comes across as intelligent, courageous and compassionate. He has some chemistry with Hilary Swank. He's good looking, and charismatic. You believe that he could in fact be a scientist, and you buy the idea that they'd trust him to solve this little problem. And there are some terrific scary scenes, like one where all the pigeons at Trafalgar Square go nuts (no one who's ever been there hasn't thought about that). Every once in awhile, they do this, put a minor-but-talented actor in a big action flick, like they did with Bill Pullman in Independence Day. Sometimes it makes 'em a star, like Harrison Ford in Raiders. Sometimes they go back to being who they were, like Mathew Broderick in Godzilla. The Core has a chance to be THAT MOVIE for Aaron. Except it may not happen; again, it got bad reviews (which again it absolutely did not deserve), and didn't do great business. Still, it would be nice to have a Mormon star, and the fact that the film didn't do well may not hurt Aaron. And a rising tide lifts all boats. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:15:46 -0700 From: "Jerry Tyner" Subject: RE: [AML] Belly Dancing Gae Lynn writes: >I would like to learn to belly dance if I thought my belly looked good enough to show (which after my six kids it doesn't). Maybe this makes = me "lewd, vulgar and indecent"--probably. Am I this way because of my = earlier repression? Or if I hadn't been repressed most of my life would I be = even worse (better?) now? Cathy Wilson wrote: >As for body shape and belly dancing, traditionally, the more mature, rounded bodies have been considered to be most attractive in the dance. = "You don't have anything to dance about till you're at least thirty-five," = one Turkish dancer pointed out. Just get yourself to a belly dance festival sometime and notice the different shapes. You will see dancers five = times larger than you are :). It's actually a wonderful way to move out of our cultural construct about what is a beautiful body and see all ages and shapes as graceful and gorgeous. >Afterwards, though, one of our ward members came up to us. "I don't = know how you could take the sacrament after that," he said. I was astonished, because I didn't feel we particularly emphasized sexuality in our dance. Belly dance, however, does emphasize the hips, so perhaps that was the problem. My wife might have already posted on this but, here goes anyway. We had = a friend (now deceased, unfortunately) who had a Christmas party at her = house. She was (like Cathy Wilson) a member of a belly dancing troop (she was = the only LDS member) and she was a member of our Ward. Many of the Sisters = in the Ward looked sideways at her because she just exuded sexuality = without even trying. She was not a skinny waif of a woman by any stretch of the imagination but she was very loving. When she danced it was not sexual = in any way but I'm sure some up tight members would have been offended. My = wife tells me of a story about her doing a belly dance (no belly showing, of course) at the Ward Christmas party as part of the Pageant. I caused = quite a stir. But I digress. There was a girl (about late 20s to early 30s) who = was at the party and everyone bugged her until she danced. She did not have = her outfit on but her dance had every man in the place captivated for the 5 = or 10 minutes she danced. Is it wrong for LDS women to do belly dancing...absolutely not! It is = good exercise and it helps them feel good about themselves. Stretch marks or = no there is a costume for every person (mid-drift showing or not). We saw several different types at the Renaissance Faire a few weeks ago. = Besides if a wife dances for her husband it is all good and many a man would envy = that husband. ;-) Literary tie in - How many places in the Scriptures did women (and men) dance? It might be apocryphal but I sure liked the scene in "The Ten Commandments" when Moses had to choose a wife. Now that would be fun. Jerry Tyner Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 18:45:35 -0600 From: "Brown" Subject: [AML] Nelson, LEE _Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer Among the Indians_ = (Review)=20 Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:21:05 -0600 Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list Title: Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer Among the Indians Authors: Mark Twain and Lee Nelson 2003, Council Press/Cedar Fort, Inc. 277 p. $18.95 Hardback. ISBN 1-55517-680-1 Not long ago Chris Bigelow questioned how a piece of Mark Twain's = unfinished writing could have ended up in Utah to be finished by Lee Nelson at = Council Press/Cedar Fort. Good question. Lee read Mark Twain's unfinished piece in a 1968 Life Magazine in a BYU barbershop. Finally, this year (2003), in a handsome hardback novel, he = has almost singlehandedly published "Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer Among the Indians." Lee Nelson certainly knows how to weave a tale, something many stylists = have difficulty doing. This book is the perfect undertaking for our Storm Testament "buffalo-ball-eating master" of western narrative. Actually, = Lee is likely better prepared for this task than Mark Twain himself. = Comfortable in the arena of western trails, horses, mules, back-packing, western and Indian life and lore, to say nothing of Mormon pioneer history, Lee = spins a remarkable yarn. Reading Mark Twain's first sixty-two pages was like rediscovering the writing of an old friend. Wonderful stuff. But the voice of Mark Twain = is one of a kind. And though Lee Nelson continues the saga attempting to = keep that voice, he lapses into too many present tense verbs, etc., and gets = off of Twain's tone and touch quickly. He handles the historical material well: Huck's meeting with Bill = Hickman and Porter Rockwell, the introduction to Fort Bridger and Fort Supply at = the time the Mormons were burning U.S. wagons to prevent the army from = coming down to Salt Lake City. He says just enough about polygamy to turn Huck = (and the reader) off, and just enough about liquor and slavery to let us know what really happened and why. Lee even invents a hilarious scenario in = which Tom reads the Book of Mormon. The story of Peggy and her little sister stolen by the Indians, the discussion revolving upon her becoming = "spoiled" all resonate with the kind of tongue-in-cheek jollity both Nelson and = Twain delight in performing. The speculation of anti-Mormon critics that he has added too much = "Mormon" is just paltry opinion. The boys were in Mormon country, for goodness' = sake! I was so grateful that Lee wrote the story instead of someone else! Even Twain would have invented some anti-Mormon scenario. It's Accurate for Mormons, and interesting to outsiders. Must be doing something right--it sold 5,000 in the first month! Except for the strained and overdone syle (and I admit it's a biggie), = the book answers my needs to read something for the national market that is = not anti-Mormon. Cheers to Lee Nelson who doesn't get many critical strokes, = but deserves kudos for a great read! Marilyn Brown [Marilyn Brown] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 03 14:33:32 -0700 From: "Jerry Tyner" Subject: RE: [AML] _Paint Your Wagon_ (Review) Eric Samuelsen said: >I'm sorry, but I just find this one of the funniest movies ever made. Unintentionally so. >But it is a bad movie, isn't it? I mean, seriously, can anyone watch = Clint Eastwood warble away about singing to trees and not get the giggles? I'm like D. Michael, I liked this movie and I think it was funny on = purpose. It wasn't an Academy Award winner but it was fun. I don't care what = anyone says I found the songs and the music interesting. When you analyze = things too deeply it takes away from the message. Think about where it was taking place. In 1840's/50's California things = were crazy in the gold camps that sprang up all over the place. Things about = that time are legendary and much of it is not recorded. I can picture those = crazy guys building those tunnels under the saloons getting the dust that fell through the floor boards and then expanding them to the entire town. The best part was when the bull fell through and wrecked the everything. And what about the preacher who was always crying repentance. Think about it from a Prophet's point of view! The polygamy part just threw a twist to = the plot line - especially the reverse polygamy. The fact they were able to = get Clint Eastwood AND Lee Marvin to sing even one song a piece was a = miracle. Many would call it not really singing but "I Was Born Under a Wandering Star" and "I Talk To The Trees"....what was the context. A man who was moving on because he felt he could not compete for the love of a = beautiful woman against a younger, handsome, and more virile man and a love sick = young man who was pining for the young and beautiful maiden whom he thought he would never have. And besides, how many miners do you know who can sing besides the owners of gambling establishments. Think about it. I really like the movie and always will. I even tracked down the DVD. Jerry Tyner Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:35:05 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] New Dialogue editors I don't think the following came thru on AML-List yet. Congrats to Levi Peterson and any other AML-Listers on the new staff. The Board of Directors of The Dialogue Foundation announces the Appointment of a New Editorial Team to Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought for a five-year term to begin in 2004 Editor.................... Karen Marguerite Moloney Associate Editor.......... Levi S. Peterson Production Manager........ Brent Corcoran Book Review Editor........ Tim Archer History Editor............ Todd Compton Fiction Editor............ Karen Rosenbaum Poetry Editor............. Lisa Bickmore Personal Essay Editor..... Linda Sillitoe Art Director.............. Warren Luch Submissions should be sent to the editors at DialogueMSS@aol.com; for queries, phone (801) 274-8210. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:41:45 -0700 From: "Jerry Tyner" Subject: RE: [AML] THURMAN, _Whitewashed Tombs_ (Review) Scott Parkin wrote: >Apparently no active Mormon can give fair consideration to an = inebriated >defendant--at least according to the lawyers (and judge) serving the = circuit >court in Provo. I agree with a few other people, this is common. I was picked for a jury = pool and was in the first twelve people called. there was no questionnaire but they = asked all of us general questions and the telling ones were: Anyone here who has never used drug or alcohol? Anyone = here who has never received a ticket or been arrested? There were several people who were dismissed ahead of me (one lady was a = CHP dispatcher). Finally it came down to the point where they could dismiss people = without cause (can't recall how many they had for this) and I was thanked for my service and = dismissed. Funny thing was another lady who was called up to the pool after I left asked = to be asked to be released from the jury since she knew the defendant. The guy got a funny = look on his face because he didn't recognize her. One night near Cal State Fullerton this = individual had been tossed out of a bar her friend owned. They found him outside passed = out near the dumpster and had to take his wallet to find out where to send him in a = cab. The charge was resisting arrest and being drunk while on campus at CSUF. Didn't = hear if he was convicted but I can't see how he got off. Bottom line, every defense attorney hates people like us in any case = involving drugs or alcohol. It makes no difference that we of all people would do our best = to be fair. To them we do not constitute a "Jury or their peers". Jerry Tyner Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #88 *****************************