From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #95 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, July 1 2003 Volume 02 : Number 095 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 10:46:12 -0600 From: Margaret Young Subject: [AML] Dealing with Our Past (was: Dutcher _Joseph_ project) The Joseph Smith Story from a woman's perspective: In response to Marilyn Brown, the title of the most thoroughly documented book about Emma is _Emma Smith: Mormon Enigma_, written by Valerie Tippetts and Linda K. Newell. I saw Linda at the MHA conference in Kirtland a few months ago. She is lovely and still, as I understand it, very supportive of the Church. (She sent me some great information on Jane Manning James. It was Linda who organized the temple work for the James family post 1978.) My information is all second or third hand. What I've heard is that Linda and Valerie were "treated very badly" after their book came out. (It was nationally published.) I don't know what all this implies, but I do know that the Church directed that they not be invited to do any firesides. At some point, the "ban" was lifted. I have heard that Valerie is no longer in the Church. The book itself was extremely well-received by historians. I remember reading a review by Leonard Arrington in which he was practically busting his buttons with pride that one of his students had done such thorough research. It makes me so sad to lose ANY Latter-day Saint because they've written something controversial. I have tried and tried to reach Lester Bush, who wrote the definitive article about Blacks and the priesthood way back in the seventies, before 1978. He, too, has left the Church. I don't think it was necessarily the difficult information he uncovered but the way he was treated after he published his article that made him feel unwelcome. What is wrong with us? I don't know who or what is behind this kind of uncharitable censorship, but it seems to me that some seek to cover our sins because they are afraid that we can't deal with our own past. I am aware of no scripture that deifies Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or anyone else from the past. I am aware of plenty of words in the various Church histories where the leaders themselves admit to being quite human. They are not the ones who insist on pedastols; it's the later generations who somehow feel that if God would remove a man from the earth rather than letting him lead the Church astray, then we cannot address any false teachings from the past. Let's make "selections" from their teachings and pretend that these selections are fully representative of what they said. How dangerous! We make the horrible assumption that people will simply forget any untoward things in our collective history and move obliviously on--as though any teenager couldn't uncover Brigham Young's speech to the territorial legislature with the click of a computer mouse. We are LOSING members because of this. Anti-Mormons have ready-made tracts which quote Brigham Young at length, and Black investigators are sure to get a visit from some well-meaning evangelical missionary eager to let them know what our past consists of. I personally have spoken to desperate missionaries whose investigators were closing the door because of these tracts. I have no problem at all with contextualizing our history, admitting that we, even we, were not immune from the prejudices and sins of the past. I don't know if Emma Smith tried to poison Joseph or not, but I know that plural marriage was a huge trial for her. What right do I have to silence her because of her pain? ________________ Margaret Young 1027 JKHB English Department Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602-6280 Tel: 801-422-4705 Fax: 801-422-0221 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 10:59:12 -0600 From: Jared Walters Subject: Re: [AML] D. Michael's Film Lab 5: THE ULTIMATE TERMINATOR PARTY Good point. Although the problem with going in with low expectations is that sometimes they can be so low that you're utterly convinced to not like the film. I've known people who bashed a movie they haven't seen and went to see it and I know deep down they liked it, but they put on ths front that they've now confirmed the movie a stinker. Another instance is they'll go through the movie wanting to keep their initial expectations intact so they'll view the movie with a real nitpicking attitude to find something that will turn them off and use it as their basis for their dislike of the film. Kind of like some of these molly mormon girls I used to date where we'll see a movie they really didn't want to see and want to leave the movie after one instance of cursing or a sex scene that happened off-screen. But you sound like someone willing to go into a movie with an open-mind that will give every movie a chance. We should rack our brains and come up with a list of best 3rd movies on hollywood sagas. The only problem here is everyone has their views on how these movies fared. I actually liked all 4 Lethal Weapon movies and thought they were for the most part equally entertaining and you never got the exact same characters on each outing. The heroes had progressed and were always changed by the events of the last movie. I don't know if James Bond movies count, but the first 4 or 5 with Sean Connery were great until Roger Moore turned the character into the court jester and then Timothy Dalton playing Bond as Shakespeare in love then Pierce Brosnan turning Bond into Remington Steele with a gun. The first 3 Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street movies (if you can admit to wasting time on them) were equally "funny" and corny enough to please the typical Wes Craven cult member. I thought Star Trek 3 was a good followup to the cliffhanger ending of part 2 with Leonard Nimoy showing he's the best director the Star Trek movies ever had. Then of course you have the 3rd's where you wonder what the heck the producers were thinking: Poltergiest 3, Karate Kid 3 (4 never happened I'm telling myself), Beverly Hills Cop 3, Superman 3 (4 never happened in my opinion). I'm not sure T3 will fit your bill on GOOD GOOD GOOD, but I think there will be people pleasantly surprised by it. Jared Walters p.s- Apparently the nudity in the film is "non-sexual" with the respective Terminators doing their arriving from the future thing. Although your wife might disagree when they "show" the female Terminator. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 10:59:12 -0700 From: "Walt Curtis" Subject: Re: [AML] BARBER, Brad _Troy Through A Window_ (Review) - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ivan Angus Wolfe" To: Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 7:20 PM Subject: Re: [AML] BARBER, Brad _Troy Through A Window_ (Review) > My question is - how do you define homosexuality? > > My question is because too often in arguments like this both sides wind up > committing the logical fallacy of equivocation by switching between differing > definitions without signaling so. > > Whenever I get into a discussion with someone over homosexuality, I make one > thing clear on my definitions (and tell others they have to spell out just as > well what they mean by these terms): > > Homosexuality means engaged in sexual relations with people of the same sex. > even if they are going through a "dry spell" (as heterosexuals often do) - if > they approve of and seek after that lifestyle, they are homosexual. > > If they are merely attracted to members of the same sex, that means they are > Same Sex Attracted (SSA) - not nessecarily homosexual. > > This is not splitting hairs. It may not be the way everyone uses the terms, but > it works. > > --ivan wolfe To complete the logical constructions, what term applies to people who are merely attracted to members of the opposite sex? Walt Curtis - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 17:03:14 -0500 From: "Lisa Tait" Subject: Re: [AML] (Des News) Dutcher _Joseph_ project - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brown" To: Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 6:09 PM Subject: Re: [AML] (Des News) Dutcher _Joseph_ project The Emma Smith volume we do have is very revealing, > but the authors had some trouble, I hear. Anybody know about it? > Marilyn Brown See Dialogue, Summer 2002 (35:2): "A History of Dialogue, Part Three: 'Coming of Age' in Utah, 1982-1987" by Devery S. Anderson. There's a fairly detailed discussion of the controversy and fallout that occurred when Valleen Tippets Avery and Linda King Newell (who was then co-editor of Dialogue, with her husband) published _Mormon Enigma_ in 1984. This entire series of articles about the history of Dialogue has been great. Lisa Tait - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:46:27 -0600 From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] HBO's _Angels in America_ in December According to "Playbill", the HBO version of Kushner's "Angels in America" will appear on the pay cable channel in December 2003. The cast includes Al Pacino and Meryl Steep, and is directed by Mike Nichols. More details are at http://www.playbill.com/news/article/79660.html R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@hotmail.com _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 07:48:20 -0500 From: "Kim Kimura" Subject: [AML] FW: BARBER, _Troy Through a Window_ James Kent, one of the national leaders of Affirmation, has provided the fo= llowing comments about "Troy Through a Window", which we are forwarding with= his permission: Troy Through A Window I was recently asked to review the film Troy Through a Window. It was film= ed, edited and produced by Brad Barber, a Senior student at BYU. The subject matter is how his LDS family has dealt with the fact that one o= f their children/siblings, Troy, is gay. Troy came out to his family at the= age of 23 in 1993. Troy is also a member of Affirmation. This intimate, personal and just under one hour documentary takes place sev= en years later, during Christmas in 2000. Brad narrates as he interviews hi= s parents, and his five siblings, including Troy. It is also full of childh= ood films which shows the Barber family growing up. I found the video to be very neutral and balanced. There will be aspects o= f the film that will both please and annoy you, regardless of whether you or= not you believe the doctrines of the LDS Church on homosexuality. The two finest points I found were the issues of stereotyping any group of = people is wrong and loving members of your family unconditionally is the ide= al within every family. The challenge the video makes is how do you respect and even accept someone= with a completely different viewpoint and way of living than you have? The best message of the video is dialogue communication, with the hope that= somewhere between a call to repentance and total acceptance, a middle groun= d can be found. It is a tragedy when family members cast out their gay and = lesbian members. It is also a tragedy when gays and lesbians cut their biol= ogical families out of their lives. Troy has the advantage of being totally immersed in LDS Culture for at leas= t 23 years, versus his family=E2=80=99s very limited contact with openly gay peopl= e or very limited knowledge of gay issues. The myth of missionaries being pulled out of San Francisco=E2=80=99s Castro Distr= ict because they were attacked by gays, rears its ugly head again. The coro= llary myth is that there are no LDS missionaries in San Francisco, because o= f its wicked gay population. These myths have existed for at least 25 years= . I would highly recommend this video to everyone of LDS Background. This film is distributed by LDS Video Store: www.LDSVideoStore.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 13:28:55 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] GRAY/YOUNG, _The Last Mile of the Way_ (Deseret News) 'Last Mile' fiction =97 but true to history By Dennis Lythgoe Deseret Morning News STANDING ON THE PROMISES, BOOK THREE: THE LAST MILE OF THE WAY, by Margaret Blair Young and Darius Aidan Gray, Bookcraft, 448 pages, $21.95. This is the third volume of "Standing on the Promises," a memorable=20 trilogy of historical novels. They are written by Margaret Blair Young, who teaches creative=20 writing at Brigham Young University, and Darius Aidan Gray, a former journalist who presides=20 over the LDS Genesis Group, organized in 1971 to provide support to church members of African=20 descent. Gray's grandfather, James Louis Gray, was born into slavery near Independence, Mo. This novel is unusually true to the history it represents, including= =20 the real names of the black families who joined the LDS Church over the years and participated in= =20 the trek west. The authors have amassed an impressive bibliography of historical sources,= =20 including books about Utah history, interviews with descendants of black Mormon pioneers,=20 letters and journal articles. Much information was gained through interviews and documents from= =20 Elder Marion D. Hanks, LDS Quorum of the Seventy Emeritus. Even though the authors have written fiction, they have based it as=20 firmly as possible in actual history =97 probably more than any other historical novel I have ever= =20 seen. They even use the actual dialect characteristic of many blacks during the 1900s =97=20 nicknamed "flat talk." The book also contains footnotes at the end of each chapter, citing the works=20 used and the people interviewed. Volumes 1 and 2 told the pioneer story, beginning with the founding of= =20 the LDS Church and including such notable black Mormons as Hark Lay, Oscar Crosby and Green= =20 Flake, the first black Mormons to enter the Great Basin (their names remain on the Brigham=20 Young Monument, between the Salt Lake Temple and the Joseph Smith Building). Volume 3 includes descendants of the original pioneers, including Jane= =20 Manning James, Isaac Lewis ("Lew") Manning, the Chambers family, the Leggroan family, the Hope=20 family, the Howell family, the Gray family, the Bridgeforth family and the Orr family. The=20 title of each chapter is taken from a Negro spiritual. The most important contribution the authors make is to capture the=20 cultural and emotional difficulty that many black Mormons felt because the LDS Church priesthood=20 was denied to black males until 1978, when President Spencer W. Kimball announced he had=20 received a revelation opening the way for them to receive the priesthood. There are insightful descriptions about the overwhelming joy they=20 received following President Kimball's revelation. One of the finest moments was Elder Boyd K.= =20 Packer of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles meeting Ruffin Bridgeforth to ordain him to=20 the priesthood. Bridgeforth told Elder Packer that his wife was ill and asked if he would=20 give her a priesthood blessing. Elder Packer said he would ordain Ruffin first, then he would=20 assist Ruffin in giving his wife a blessing. This is an exceptional historical novel - more historical than=20 fictional - but expressive in its sensitive account of black Mormons. _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. =20 http://join.msn.com/?page=3Dfeatures/featuredemail - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 13:34:37 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] FW: DENTON, _American Massacre_ (SL Tribune) [Hi, I'm not really back, but I noticed these two reviews in the Utah papers hadn't been posted on the list. In this one, Martin "I-hate-Brigham-Young" Naparsteck is in usual knee-jerk form, taking as a given anything bad said about BY or the Mormons is true.] Mountain Meadows massacre analysis ends with an accusation By Martin Naparsteck The Salt Lake Tribune American Massacre By Sally Denton Knopf, $26.95 Brigham Young, as portrayed in Sally Denton's American Massacre, is a murderer and liar and commits treason. Her case is more strongly stated than in the two best previous books on the same subject, Juanita Brooks' 1950 Mountain Meadows Massacre and Will Bagley's 2002 Blood of the Prophets. For those who view Young as a great man who did little or no wrong, her tone will be blasphemous; for those who view him as a self-centered dictator or worse, her argument will seem highly credible. When the 1857 massacre occurred at Mountain Meadows in southwestern Utah - -- the cold- blooded murder of at least 120 men, women and children on a wagon train headed from Arkansas to California -- LDS Church officials claimed Paiute Indians were responsible. Now, almost a century and a half after the event, nearly all reputable historians believe the murderers were white Mormons. Up to 50 Mormons took part in the murders, but only John D. Lee was punished; he was executed at the meadows 20 years later. Although he was clearly guilty, history also judged Lee to be a sacrificial lamb whose death by firing squad ended two decades of investigation into just how high in the church culpability reached. There is disagreement among historians about exactly how many people were killed, how many Mormons took part in the murders, how much loot was taken, how many small children survived. But one overarching question dominates historical inquiries into the massacre: Did Brigham Young order the killings? Gordon B. Hinckley, current president of the church, speaking at 1999 ceremonies marking the placement of a monument that for the first time acknowledged Mormons were responsible, said: "That which we have done here must never be construed as an acknowledgment on the part of the church of any complicity in the occurrences of that fateful day." Brooks, a devout member of the church, showed great courage in publishing her book at a time when she risked excommunication and social ostracism. But she never seriously addressed the question of Young's involvement. She merely asked the question and, in essence, answered that there wasn't enough evidence on either side to answer it. Bagley (who writes a history column for The Salt Lake Tribune) used numerous sources not available to Brooks and concluded, essentially, that nothing of significance could occur in Utah in 1857 without Young's knowledge and approval. He stopped about a quarter-inch short of saying Young ordered the killings. Denton comes even closer to saying Young knew in advance and probably ordered the killings. She gets as close to making that charge as a serious scholar can (and this book, regardless of whether you agree with the author's conclusions, is indeed serious scholarship) without a signed confession. She repeatedly calls Young a dictator, depicts him as mean-spirited and claims he lied when he denied that Mormons perpetrated the killings. The massacre occurred after President James Buchanan ordered the U.S. Army to remove Young from office. Young had been appointed governor of Utah Territory by President Millard Fillmore and ran Utah more as a theocracy than as a territory of the United States. Buchanan intended to establish U.S. authority over Utah. Young responded by putting Utah under martial law, ordering the destruction of army supplies and preparing to go to war with the United States. Under any reasonable definition of the term, he was guilty of treason. Buchanan avoided a shooting war between Utah and the United States partly by promising Young and other Mormon leaders a pardon from charges of treason. The war was averted, but the massacre had taken place. Brooks wrote near the end of her book, "While Brigham Young . . . did not specifically order the massacre, [he] did preach sermons and set up social conditions which made it possible." Bagley wrote, "As long as modern [church leaders] deny that the LDS church had 'any complicity in the occurrences of that fateful day,' they can never come to terms with the truth." Denton writes, "Within the context of the era and the history of Brigham Young's complete authoritarian control over his domain and his followers, it is inconceivable that a crime of this magnitude could have occurred without direct orders from him." There is a progression worthy of note, from Brooks' courage in defying her church to the thorough and convincing scholarship of Bagley to the daring accusation of Denton. It is like three trial lawyers working together: Brooks with the opening argument, Bagley presenting endless details to the jury and Denton with the summation. In Lee's first trial, the jury was hung because a majority of the jurors were Mormon and perhaps acting on orders from church leaders. In the second trial, church leaders, seeking to end the country's insistence that someone be punished, may have instructed the jurors to find him guilty. The jury of readers of history must now decide whom they take orders from: a church leadership embarrassed by its past or their own consciences. ----- Martin Naparsteck reviews books from and about the West for The Salt Lake Tribune. _________________________________________________________________ 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: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 23:33:57 GMT From: "Jeffrey Needle" Subject: [AML] YOUNG & GRAY, _The Last Mile of the Way_ (Review) Review Title: The Last Mile of the Way (Standing on the Promises, Book 3) Author: Margaret Blair Young and Darius Aidan Gray Publisher: Bookcraft Year Published: 2003 Number of Pages: 448 Binding: Hardback ISBN: 1-57008-904-3 Price: $21.95 Reviewed by Jeffrey Needle (I could not write this review without using a word generally deemed offensive. I elected to include the word because the context would make little sense without it.) Every morning I wake up and take a good look at myself in the mirror, wondering what the new day will bring. Essentially retired, I have the time to explore the nooks and crannies of life, poking my nose into things that interest me, sometimes coming away being rather surprised. But I'm not often appalled. Having finished "The Last Mile of the Way," having spent the last evening devouring the last 100 pages, I feel as if I've been pulled through an emotional wringer. I'm not sure I like the feeling, but like a potion, I suppose it's good for the soul. Readers of the first two volumes will recall that this series chronicles the experience of blacks in early Mormonism. Rich in flavor, sparing in detail, eminently readable, the earlier volumes were a wonderful survey of how these good people were treated, not just by the Church, but by the larger American society. It remains a sin, a blot on the American character, that we allowed this treatment to last as long as it did. When emancipation finally came in the 1860's, it appeared that the promise of freedom was to be fulfilled. But this was not to be so; racial strife, discrimination, hatred, survived emancipation, and in fact festered like an open wound. A shame, a disgrace. While we acknowledge this problem in the larger American society, one would have hoped that Christ's Church would behave better. Those who accepted the Restored gospel should have known, if only from the Book of Mormon, that all are alike unto God, no matter the color of their skin. Alas, this was not to be the case, either. And such is the shame of Mormonism's past. To be fair, racism has been rampant in the U.S. for generations. I can't think of a time when minorities were treated fairly. Even to this day, racism rears its ugly head, manifesting in acts of unspeakable cruelty and violence. The recent death of James Byrd, having been dragged to his death from the rear bumper of a vehicle, demonstrates that racism is not a problem of the past at all. We have not overcome. "The Last Mile of the Way" brings us very much to the present day, and brings closure to the lives of so many folks we met in the first two volumes. We are also introduced into the world of one of its authors, Darius Gray. I should mention that I've known Margaret Young for several years, but only met Darius once. My immediate impression was of a happy, fulfilled, committed man, dedicated to the Church and to the Genesis Group, which he now heads up. I could not have known the depth of his experience, the rough road he had to travel in order to get where he is today. If it seems a bit egocentric to focus so largely on one of the authors and his family, I came to understand Darius' life as symbolic of the larger black Mormon experience. It's been a battle, it is still a battle, and it is likely to remain a battle. One of the surprises of this book was the involvement of men who would later become General Authorities. No less than Spencer W. Kimball and Gordon B. Hinckley, among many others, show themselves as part of the larger story of the development of black involvement in the Church. Each demonstrated a concern, and in many cases a genuine love, for their brothers and sisters; some would play a role in the formation of the Genesis Group and, finally, in the lifting of the priesthood ban. But this is no good-times story. Expect to be uncomfortable while reading the narrative. With each chapter, I found myself asking, "How much can any person take? How much courage did it take to stand up against the radical racism of one's fellow church members? How easy would it have been to just give up?" Indeed. When Darius first arrived at BYU as a young undergrad, he found he was one of only two black students. And the other student didn't stay for long. After all, how often do you have to hear, "Go back where you belong, nigger!", before you decide to throw in the towel and seek friendlier company? And how many times must a black family sit in sacrament meeting and be refused the sacrament, simply because of their skin color? How many indignities must one endure for the sake of the Gospel? And why aren't believers in the Gospel behaving any better? The authors leave it to the reader to come up with the answers to these questions. The narrative is tantamount to a frontal attack on one's sensibilities. It presents a Mormonism that many will not recognize. And it will cause many a reader to look deeply into one's one soul to determine whether he is part of the problem, or part of the solution, as the old saying goes. This book differs from the previous two in an important way: while the first two volumes are anecdotal and self-contained, this third volume has a clear direction, a destination. From the outset, in fact from the title itself, we learn that we, and the characters, are on "the last mile of the way." There is a clear destination in sight, an end to a long and tiresome journey. That end is an end to the priesthood ban, the opening of the blessings of priesthood to all worthy males. (But no females...) With each step, you can just feel the confidence of some of the characters, the frustration of others who are impatient for the change. Some want to rush the Lord; some think the Brethren just aren't trying hard enough. But, as you know, the change *did* come, and the blessings were given. It was a great day indeed. I am going to say this as clearly as I can -- every member of the Church should read this book. Period. You don't need the first two books in order to understand this volume, but they help. This book is so important because, sadly, the problem of racism has not disappeared. The Church still deals with the problem and tries to move its membership in a righteous and just direction. But, as with the larger American society, the task is difficult. Readers will gain an appreciation: for the enormous sacrifices made by people of color in early Mormonism; for the almost unbelievable humiliation and persecution they had to endure as members of the Church; for the strength and courage they demonstrated in looking beyond their environment, keeping their eyes on the real goal; for the strong sense of family and friendship that kept them faithful and true; for their commitment to overcoming the covert and overt hatred they felt as they made their faith journeys. There are lessons to be learned here, inspiration to be gleaned. I read the book in just three sittings. It's really that good. Be prepared to learn, to smile, and to be very, very disturbed. But please, read this book. - ----------------------------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #95 *****************************