From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #133 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, August 26 2003 Volume 02 : Number 133 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:05:04 -0700 (PDT) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Deseret News: Hatch Friend Buys His CD's deseretnews.com Deseret News, Friday, August 22, 2003 Hatch friend buys his CDs Developer says purchase of 1,200 discs not political By Lee Davidson Deseret Morning News WASHINGTON =97 As he was seeking political favors, a friend of Sen. Orrin= Hatch=20 bought a whopping 1,200 copies of Hatch's largely self-produced music CDs,= for=20 which Hatch receives $3 to $7 each. Hatch, R-Utah, and his friend, Monzer Hourani, a Houston developer who twice= =20 before has landed Hatch into major ethics controversies, say he wasn't= trying to=20 buy political help with those CDs and they merely share a love of his music. But the story, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, is attracting= national=20 attention because, of course, ethics rules ban lobbyists from paying money= =20 directly to senators. Also, the situation is reminiscent of a scandal that forced former House= Speaker=20 Jim Wright, D-Texas, to resign. In it, labor unions and other interest= groups=20 bought in bulk copies of a book that Wright wrote =97 giving him extra= royalties.=20 The House Ethics Committee accused him of using that purchase to evade= outside=20 earnings limits. It isn't the first time that Hourani has caused ethics headaches for Hatch.= =20 Hourani was fined $10,000 in 1995 by the Federal Election Commission for=20 illegally trying to evade donation limits. After he gave Hatch the maximum= =20 allowed, Hourani gave money to employees to donate in their names to him.= Hatch=20 said he didn't know about it, and he was not forced to return the illegal=20 donations. A more serious episode deepened Hatch's involvement in the Bank of Credit= and=20 Commerce International (BCCI) scandal, a bank closed for money laundering.= After=20 Hatch gave a Senate speech defending that bank, he asked its president to=20 consider giving Hourani a loan. It helped deepen an ethics probe into= whether=20 Hatch unethically helped BCCI for favors, but he was cleared of any= misdeeds. This time, the Wall Street Journal reported that about when Hourani sought a= =20 favor from Hatch, he bought 1,200 copies of religious and patriotic music= that=20 Hatch recorded largely with his own financing through Prime Recordings.= Hourani=20 gave away the albums. Hourani did not return phone calls to the Deseret Morning News seeking= comment.=20 Adam Elggren, Hatch's spokesman, said Hatch has "never really made any= money" on=20 those particular recordings and has broken about even after costs. Meanwhile, Hatch's financial disclosure statement shows he also has an= agreement=20 with Medistar =97 a "medical real estate company" led by Hourani =97 to= distribute=20 Hatch CDs, an unusual arrangement for any company not in the music business. Elggren said the senator had earned little or no money through that= distribution=20 arrangement with Medistar. Hatch's office declined to provide a copy of the= =20 contract with Medistar. While Hourani bought Hatch's CDs, the Wall Street Journal reported that he= also=20 volunteered to seek help from the senator for HealthSouth, a health-care=20 provider that is a major client of Hourani. HealthSouth worried that a change in Medicare's policy for reimbursing=20 physical-therapy costs would cut its annual profit by $175 million. Hourani= told=20 the Journal that he told a HealthSouth lobbyist that he would see what he= could=20 do to help, and that he "mentioned" the matter to Hatch "but did not tell= Hatch=20 to call anybody." Hatch did call the administrator of Medicare asking him to look into the= matter,=20 the Journal reported. But Hatch told the paper he did so at the request of= the=20 man who was then HealthSouth's CEO, not at the request of Hourani. But Hatch= =20 said he was aware that HealthSouth was a major client of Hourani's Medistar. Medicare did not give HealthSouth the relief it sought. HealthSouth also is= =20 currently embroiled in an accounting scandal, and 14 of its executives have= been=20 charged with fraud. Hourani is a native of Lebanon who converted to The Church of Jesus Christ= of=20 Latter-day Saints 20 years ago. Hatch said he was first introduced to him by= =20 friends who asked him to help the Arab adapt to the LDS faith. "Monzer Hourani and I have been very close friends since I first began to=20 counsel him as a member of the LDS Church almost 20 years ago. I love Monzer= =20 like a brother. He is a warm, decent, high-quality individual and a= brilliant=20 engineer, and he shares my love of classical and inspirational music =97= that's=20 why we have worked together to produce some CDs. Finally, I cannot stress= enough=20 that I have always disclosed all of my royalties," Hatch said. Hatch and Hourani have had some other business arrangements as well. Hourani= =20 once managed for Hatch a small blind trust, in which Hatch originally= invested=20 $10,000. Hourani bought a rental townhome in Houston for Hatch with that= money=20 and managed it. Hatch and his office denounced any suggestion that political favors were, or= =20 could, be bought from him. "People often try to smear Sen. Hatch because he's an effective,= influential,=20 conservative lawmaker =97 he's a high-profile target. But the insinuations= made in=20 this story are without merit," Elggren said. "As best as we can determine, no lobbyist has ever bought Sen. Hatch's CDs= in=20 any significant quantity =97 certainly nothing resembling a bulk purchase.= The=20 point is, everything he has done has been completely above-board, he's=20 recognized as a successful songwriter, and all his royalties have been= disclosed=20 as required," Elggren added. Hatch also issued a statement saying, "Everybody who knows me knows I make= music=20 as a labor of love. . . . I'm grateful I've had some success as a= songwriter,=20 but the important thing is, I'm able to share my thoughts and feelings with= =20 others through music. I'm going to keep doing that." E-mail: lee@desnews.com =A9 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company=20 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 17:30:01 -0700 (PDT) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Great and Noble Ones - --- Margaret Young wrote: . Surely there=92s plenty we = > can > pick away at. [snip] Thank you for this beautiful post. It puts into perspective a lot of the petty little worries that we allow to distract us from the essence of the Gospel. Yes, I get upset with the silliness that can happen in cultural Mormonism. But when we get real adversity; when we come face to face with illness, death and mortality, that's when the spirit speaks to us and lets us know what's really important. Margaret's post may be the single most important thing I have ever read on AML-List. R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:41:06 -0600 From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Perceptions of Errors (clarified) I think that we have established a pretty reliable posit in our church doctrine that none of us (humans) are anywhere near perfect. Christ was the only perfect one, and we are all trying to follow Him. The world is not perfect, nothing is perfect. That is why we were created and sent here to earth to gain further light and knowledge and learn how to deal with the physical aspects of life eternal. I also believe that part of our mission is to help perfect the earth while we struggle to perfect ourselves. If humans are not perfect, and GA's are humans, then it stands to reason that Ga's are not perfect, but they are more perfect than any of the rest of us, and when they make a mistake it is usually based on a righteous motive, and as long as we do not go overboard on it or carry it to self interpreted extremes, we won't be led too far astray. Bill Willson, writer http://www.iwillwriteit.com http://www.latterdaybard.com Here's a great place for LDS artists to show and sell their work. http://www.minutemall.com CHECK IT OUT! - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:18:33 -0600 From: "Jongiorgi's e-mail" Subject: Re: [AML] Val Kilmer and Joseph Smith Very good points, Thom. I agree, Portman, usually great, is pretty bad in the SW's. I have a second theory. This film was almost entirely shot on blue-screen, forcing the actors to constantly work in an environment where they had to supply their surroundings, and even other characters they had to interact with, mentally. I imagine that is a draining process week after week. Perhaps even the best actor starts phoning it in when half their scenes are on blue soundstages talking to crewmembers in blue tights holding a tennis ball on a stick over their head to represent an alien's eye-line. Jongiorgi Enos - ----- Original Message ----- From: Thom Duncan > Is he that bad and actor or is George a bad director. I just finished > watching the Professional with a young Natalie Portman. She was > marvelous in that. In SW, she sucked big time. Some actors need great > directors to be good (Gregory Peck was among them). Other actors (like > Gene Hackman) nail their performances every time no matter who the > director is. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 21:58:04 -0600 From: Ben Parkinson Subject: re: [AML] Heavenly Mothers Linda Adams wrote: <<<<< There has never been a denial of the concept of a Mother in Heaven, although it's common knowledge that this is the usual interpretation of "O My Father." But to my recollection it's never been preached from the pulpit either, as doctrine. >>>>> The doctrinal basis is a statement by Joseph F. Smith and the First Presidency: "All men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother, and are literally the sons and daughters of Deity" (James. R. Clark, comp., Messages of the First Presidency, 4:203).This is the Nov. 1909 statement on the Origin of Man, which is at least as significant a document as the Proclamation on the Family--about as close to scripture as you can get without being scripture. (It was reprinted in the Ensign in Feb. 2002.) The doctrine is taught in our manuals, including the Old Testament gospel doctrine manual and the Doctrines of the Gospel institute manual I'm working to retypeset now. Our curriculum writers are instructed that they can teach it from time to time. Ben Parkinson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 23:29:49 -0600 From: Ben Parkinson Subject: [AML] More Bookbinding Adventures I've continued to experiment with bookbinding and have made some headway. My goal is to print and bind the series of family histories I'm writing, but this applies to any kind of small-scale self-publishing. (The other day I took my family to see O Brother Where Art Thou, and the kids got interested in the Odyssey. So I downloaded the text from Project Gutenberg, spent an evening or two typesetting and printing it, hand bound it, with a photo of a Greek vase printed on the front cover, and then gave it to them to read. In spite of a few flaws, it looks as good as most books you'd buy, and a far sight better than the Penguin editions. I've got three of my kids working on their own books right now, partly on the promise to hand bind them when they're done.) First a few technical notes, and then I'll describe my process as it's evolved. I've soured on Yes glue because it doesn't seem to dry hard enough and sometimes separates. Based on advice from Paris Anderson and Michael Collings, I went to Aleene's Tacky Glue, a PVA glue, and have been happy with the results. I think Elmers would probably work as well. Elmers used to be like wood glue, and I think Elmer's School Glue may still be, but Elmer's all purpose glue I'm pretty sure is a PVA glue now. This is based on classroom chemistry experiments my wife Robin has done with the different glues--she's convinced the two kinds of Elmer's are different and that the all-purpose glue is a PVA. We still have problems with the covers warping, but after a conversation with an artist I work with (who recommended we heat them in the oven), we figured out we could iron them. There's a kind of paper used for ironing transfers onto fabric that we use to keep from scorching them. Once we iron them, they seem to stay flat--this seems to have solved the problem. I've figured out more convenient ways to make signatures using Microsoft Publisher. You can set the whole book in one big chunk, and then print 32-page sections as separate booklets--each will come out as a signature without you having to lay it out that way. Publisher apparently will only let you have one set of page numbers, which is pretty stupid when you consider how many books use separate pagination for the front matter--pretty well all of them. But you can set the first signature separately and do those page numbers manually. I made a template with the page numbers in their own "story." (A "story" in desktop publishing is a discrete set of linked text boxes. A desktop publishing file can have one or more stories--you typically would have a story for each chapter, or you might even put the entire book in a single story.) Each text box in my page number story is one line long. I can edit the entire story in Microsoft Word, though , so I simply load it into Word and type the sequence of numbers I want with a number on each line, like this: i ii iii iv v vi 1 2 3 or whatever. Each number appears in the proper box on each page, and it's not hard to adjust the numbering or to insert or delete pages. I still print my signatures to PDF using Adobe Acrobat. I was typesetting a 6x9 book for my cousin and made a happy little discovery. Before I was having to print these on ledger paper and then fold and trim (emphasis on "trim"--you waste a lot of paper going from 11x17 to 9x12 ). But if you use Acrobat Reader's shrink-to-fit-page feature, you can print a book in that format on letter paper, trim just a bit, and get a book that's not too different from trade paperback. I plan to make a large-print and a small-print edition of this particular book. The shrunken type is still very smooth and readable, but some of my older cousins will appreciate the larger type of the full-size edition. Here's my process for binding books, then: * I typeset in Microsoft Publisher and print out 32-page signatures, usually 8 sheets of legal paper or letter paper in landscape mode. I fold the signatures and crease them with a bone folder. Lately I've been weighting them with encyclopedias so they'll lie flatter when I sew them. * I punch holes for the thread. To do this I open the signatures and place them in the corner of a shoebox on my lap. I place a paper guide on this with the locations for the holes marked and then punch through them with a thin awl I bought at an art supply store (together with the bone folder). * I stretch three strands of twill tape between two shelves on my wall and secure them with masking tape and then sew the signatures using waxed carpet thread. (I follow the directions in Aldren A. Watson's "Hand Bookbinding"--I think this part is pretty universal.) * I glue on the end-pieces. For my latest books I'm trying out construction paper, which must be about 30 or 40 pound. I trim them to the same size as the paper I printed on (letter or legal as the case may be) and then fold them in half. Then I use a piece of wax paper for masking as I spread a thin bead of glue along the spine-edge of the outer signature and attach the end paper for that side. I weight it an hour or two and do the same for the other side. * I place the sewn book between two plywood boards, tug on the tapes, square up the signatures with an L-square, and clamp down the boards with C-clamps. I measure everything to make sure it's even and then screw it down pretty tight. I apply glue to the spine and glue on a muslin mull and let it dry overnight. * I use my square to help me draw trim lines. I'd been doing my own trimming with a book cutter we have at work but never could get it quite smooth--maybe the blade's gone dull. This last time I took it to our company print shop instead, which trimmed them very well and didn't charge me anything, though they seem to have gone about 1/8th of an inch past my trim lines. * Since I've gotten better at this and am managing to do all the previous steps and come out with a square book, I find I can do the cover separately and glue it on after the fact. I cut the boards, either from matte scraps from the local bookstore or from binder board. (I think matte is probably adequate for a lighter book.) I make them long enough so there's maybe a 1/8 inch overlap on top and bottom, but on width I make them the same size as the pages, so there'll be an indentation where the covers bend. I cut a piece for the spine of thin cardboard rather than the heavier matte or binder board. * I print cover papers for the front and back. I use my Epson C82 printer, which will only print 8 1/2 inches wide--meaning you have to do it in three pieces--but which gives truly photographic images using inks rated to last 70 years. This is better than you'd do with even higher-end Epsons right now, though I understand there's been a lot of clamor for it in the art market, so it's no doubt on the way. I've printed onto watercolor papers and various other heavy art papers, and they seem to work very well. * I print the spine piece on the third piece of paper. This is my biggest innovation since my last post. I'd been using cloth for this and trying to figure out how to print on textile. We looked at transfers and screen printing but couldn't come up with anything that seemed durable enough. We tried printing on colored papers with the Epson, but the results were readable or even recognizable--these printers depend on the white already being there. Finally it occurred to me I could print a dark background on white paper and leave the lettering white and get it to stand out that way. My latest spine papers have been on cardstock, which seems to work fine. This might not be as durable as cloth, but then again it might actually be stronger if it's less likely to fray or separate from the boards. If Paris Anderson is right that the strength of this kind of book is in the mull, I figure my chances are good. * I glue the cover papers to the cover boards, fold, trim, etc. I follow Watson's instructions pretty much here, and then weight everything with encyclopedias. * When that's dry, I attach the cover to the book by gluing the mull to the boards, and then I fold down the end papers and glue those to the boards and then weight everything. I follow Watson's suggestion of slipping sheets of wax paper between the pages to keep the glue from going where it shouldn't. I slip a sheet of cardboard under the end by the spine to get the crease as it dries. * In theory the glue on the outside of the boards (from the cover papers) causes them to warp one way, and the glue on the inside (from the end papers) brings them back. In practice, I can't seem to get them flat. So I iron them after the fact, using the kind of paper you use for cloth transfers to keep from scorching the book. * When it's all dry, I wrap the pages in wax paper and spray the cover with a UV varnish. This protects the Epson inks, which are only rated to last a long time if they've got UV protection. It also protects the paper covers against smudges, which they seem to attract like magnets. I wind up with a book that looks pretty much like one you buy in a store. The main difference is the picture is on the cover rather than on a jacket. It's kind of like a paperback book in that way. Besides that the main giveaway is that my books don't have the little epaulette pieces along the spine--I'm looking for a cheap place to buy those. I don't think they serve any structural purpose, unless it's to obscure any unevenness in your sewing. This kind of binding I believe will prove much more durable than perfect binding or the other styles people are using. The books lie flat, can be photocopied without putting stress on the binding, and to all appearances should hold up to repeated readings over many years (and hopefully many decades). But getting them to look professionally made is also a preservation issue. It helps convince your readers, far flung in time and space, that this is a "real" book, so they're less likely to throw it away 75 years from now when Grandma dies and they're cleaning out her things. Ben Parkinson Ogden, Utah, USA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 13:59:56 +0000 From: "margaret young" Subject: [AML] Joseph Smith Ordination of Elijah Abel This message is from Margaret Young, using home internet (Greenhark@hotmail.com). Apparently, there are a number of people wondering about the veracity of the claim that Joseph Smith ordained Elijah Abel to the priesthood. I received a call from the Church Historical Department on Thursday asking what source we (Darius Gray and I) had for that information. Unfortunately, I had to report that we do NOT have the primary documentation--the certificate itself. I did not write down the name of the man who called me, so if any of you receiving this post has contacts in the Church Historical department, please forward this and ask that it be circulated. My sources were Newell Bringhurst, probably the leading expert on Elijah Abel, and Marie Taylor, a remarkable genealogist who specializes in African American genealogy and African American Church history. Marie responded to the question this way: "When I saw the information it was in the Family History Library. However, the film was removed several years later to the Historical Department. In the old days, they made copies by pressing the original inked letters between wetted pages of a bound book of onion skin. The moisture caused fresh ink from the originals to seep into the onion skin, creating mirror images. I can't remember now if it was just a register of men ordained or if it was a copy of the certificate like the kind I mention above." The man I spoke to from the Church Historical department indicated that the only certificate they had was the register of men ordained into the priesthood in 1836, signed by Joseph Smith. When I spoke directly to Newell Bringhurst about the documentation, he regretfully could not give primary proof. However, Newell does provide secondary documentation in his book _Saints, Slaves and Blacks_, published by Greenwood Press. He says on page 37 that the ordination "according to at least one account, was performed by Joseph Smith." His source for that is a manuscript by Eunice Kenny titled "My Testimony of the Latter Day Work" published around 1885 and located in the Church Historical Department. There are some important conclusions I draw from this information: 1) We should perhaps include Newell's phrase "according to at least one account" in our endnotes and maybe use the word "likely" on the book cover's mention of the ordination. 2) We cannot state with absolute certainty that Joseph Smith ordained Elijah Abel, though it seems at least likely. Certainly, Joseph Smith knew of the ordination. Joseph Sr. gave Elijah a patriarchal blessing which acknowledged, "Thou hast been ordained an elder..." 3) If indeed (as I believe) Joseph Smith ordained Elijah Abel, that fact was not widely known in later years. Had it been known, the meeting of John Taylor, A.O. Smoot and Zebedee Coltrin in 1879 (see _Bound for Canaan_) would surely have mentioned it. As it was, the primary proof of Elijah's priesthood was the reading of his patriarchal blessing at that particular meeting. This is the best I can do with the documentation, given the fact that we do not have the original certificate. I am certainly willing to acknowledge what we DON'T have, but would also ask that the sources we do have be given their due. Unfortunately, we have nothing written by ELijah Abel himself. Since we do have a document from Nauvoo wherein he signs an "X" for his name, we know he could not write during those years. I assume there are no records of his life from his own account, only from others' accounts. Unfortunately, that's all we have to go on. With Jane James, who dictated her life history, we have much more reliable data. We also know (from a letter she dictated to Wilford Woodruff) that she was aware of another black man who had the priesthood--Walker Lewis. She reported that Lewis had been ordained by Parley P. Pratt, though that was incorrect. My information says that William Smith, brother of Joseph, ordained Walker Lewis. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 09:48:27 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Perceptions of Error among Leaders D. Michael Martindale wrote: > When Jesus condemns the Pharisees, I think he's speaking as much to us > in modern times as he was to his contemporaries. Are we piling on our > own set of ad hoc rules that we demand each other live, because we > somehow don't think the principles of the gospel are good enough to > teach us to govern ourselves? I'm not sure it's about not trusting the gospel so much as it's about not trusting ourselves. It's why Satan's plan drew an entire third of the hosts of heaven away--people are afraid of their own potential for error and want to be saved from their own mistakes. Sure, some of those that followed Satan were evil in heart and wanted to overthrown God's power, but I suspect an awful lot of them were just afraid of failing. Or maybe I'm projecting. It's why I have an increasingly hard time condemning people for their behavioral excesses--of either the conservative or liberal sort. I think most people operate at least partially on a basis of fear. I hedge myself up with little rules designed to keep me from really, truly messing up, then feel threatened when someone takes an apparently cavalier and dismissive attitude toward my efforts to save my own soul. In an effort to justify my own choices I turn my focus outward on the flaws of others rather than inward on the quality of my own desires. That's less about hypocrisy than about unintentional self-deception. The pharisees really were hypocrites who had devised one standard of living for themselves and another standard for others--then enforced it from their positions of power. They knew that what they were doing was protecting their own power base, not trying to improve the lives of others. It was yet another hijack of religion by the cynical and politically motivated. I don't think most people operate from that position of knowledge of the error of their own practices. I think most people have a vague sense that they still haven't quite got it right, but honestly believe that if everyone would act the way they do the world would be a better place. I regularly curse other motorists with a muttered "May you always be surrounded by people who drive just like you." I think there's a difference between hypocrisy and inconsistency (or the moral tyrrany that can often result). From my perspective, most people (Mormon or otherwise) really want to be better than they are. When they fail to live up to their own moral vision, they become angry and often take it out on others--not because they excuse their own behavior, but because they truly hate their own failures. They already feel pretty poorly about their own efforts and want to expose the errors of others so they don't have to hate themselves along with their errors. Having said all of that, I honestly believe that most of us don't have sufficient faith in the atonement of Christ. Many of us fear that we can't really be forgiven for our sins, that even God can't be that understanding. I think its why so many Mormons get hung up on the concept of punishment as opposed to justice--we can't ensure justice, but we darned well *can* mete out punishment in a hope of creating good behavior in others, and perhaps even assuage our own guilt that despite our own weakness we're still doing a good work. (I just finished reading "Crime and Punishment;" can you tell?) It's a core struggle of Mormonism--to allow others the space to both err and repent. Where does stewardship (...the sin be on the head of the parents...) intersect with true justice, mercy, and the need for real, internalized repentence? Most of the Mormon literature I've read stops somewhat short of that core struggle. Many stories are an attempt to justify a particular set of behaviors (permissive or restrictive) as good and righteous--in the process dismissing or villainizing other behavior that may be equally effective for people who think differently. A sort of passive-aggressive counter-judgment against all those people who judge me. I'm listening to Metallica's black album as I write this (cheers, Chris) and I'm struck again at how effectively they use the principles of tolerance and acceptance to utterly condemn those whose methods of self justification differ from their own. Tolerance should always be used to excuse my own excesses while condemning the excesses of others. Mormons have been no different in telling our stories. Either on the right or the left. Is there a market for a story wherein people with utterly different approaches to both public and private morality can be shown as equally valid--and righteous? I don't recall ever seeing it done. There's still plenty of room for conflict in a story like that, but the focus changes from being a condemnation of those people over there to an exploration of coming to acceptance of that group of "us" who behave so differently than I do. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 12:21:51 EDT From: Turk325@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Perceptions of Error among Leaders An earlier post mentioned, "Joseph Smith gave us a good basic outline to follow when he said, 'Teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves.'" A small but important point: The quotation is "I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves" (Messages of the First Presidency, Vol.3, p.54). Note the difference. One quotation implies control over the people: "*Let* them govern themselves." (As if governance can be let.) The other implies no such control: "They govern themselves." Joseph implied no such control. Meaning behind the words. Wow. Kurt Weiland - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 14:43:33 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Val Kilmer and Joseph Smith At 05:20 PM 8/21/03 -0500, you wrote: >And no one has suggested the one name that absolutely every single woman I >know swoons over (including myself, and I honestly do not pay much >attention to these things): Orlando Bloom. Well, he doesn't do it for me, and I'm very swoonable. So now you know one! Mybe it's because at my age he just looks like baby beefcake. In LOTR, I liked Boromir because I love Sean Bean. He had a great death scene, but I fantasized about pulling his funeral boat out of the water and miraculously restoring him to life. Sean is a cross-genre actor--fantasy in LOTR, adventure fiction in the Richard Sharpe movies, villainy in that Harrison Ford movie, and sex object in Lady Chatterly, which for some reason is considered great literature. There's my connection! I don't know who he could play in a Mormon movie. If he were in the bishopric and on the stand every Sunday, I'll bet there would be great attendance among a certain segment of sisters. barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 08:20:47 -0600 From: Melanie Dahlin Subject: Re: [AML] Perceptions of Error among Leaders We can read anything into any statement. General authorities are inclined to their own opinion from time to time. They are, after all, human; however, if they have an opinion that goes against actual commandments, then that is when general authorities are removed from the church. We must learn to filter through spiritual facts from opinions. When there is conflicting information on a specific issue (i.e. wearing white shirts to pass the sacrament), then most likely the information is a G.A.'s opinion and not God's commandment. Granted, it isn't true in every case, but it seems to be true in some cases. Finally, the issue about race is extremely controversial. It is a touchy subject and one that is not well-understood. Many statements have been made by general authorities which seem to contradict our current, religious beliefs. However, it is important to keep in mind the "social times" of the statements. Many years ago, blacks (and other races) were slaves and it was an acceptable social practice. Thus, when the church was first organized, racial inequality was a social belief that many people, including some general authorities, still held. God could not expect the embryo church members and leaders to suddenly live the adult law all at once. They needed to go through a gradual, growing, process. The higher law of equality has since been taught and publicized. In our current "social time," we base our knowledge on those teachings of our forefathers; therefore, we believe in the law of equality and hold to it. We base our knowledge on the knowledge and experiences of our forefathers, and we have developed their ideas. Without that initial basis, we would be wafting through spiritual, racial, moral, emotional, political, and intellectual matters much like the early leaders of the church. God must lead his children along. Again, He cannot expect imperfect beings to live a perfect law all at once. It takes time, patience, and experience. DO NOT misunderstand me. I am not excusing the behavior and words of the early church leaders. I am only trying to help people understand the true processes at work. [Melanie Dahlin] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 10:58:49 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] (SL Trib) Review: _The Wives of Short Creek_ Slapstick in print By Martin Naparsteck Special to the Tribune The Wives of Short Creek By Gerald Grimmett Limberlost Press, $21.95 Gerald Grimmett in The Wives of Short Creek has given us a good, old-fashioned farce, and like all farces, it needs a target. His target, as the title suggests (Short Creek is the former name of Colorado City, the world's most famous polygamist community), is religious extremism. The plot of the novel revolves around a claim by a community member that he possesses the only copy of "the last prophecy" of Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church, and an attempt by the publisher of a Salt Lake City newspaper, the Courier & Mail, to purchase it for $2 million. Farce, of course, is melodrama that is intended to be funny. (We often laugh at melodrama that isn't farce, but the writer doesn't want us to). As such, it deals with overdrawn plots and inflated characters -- and Grimmett's novel is no exception. When farce is a work of literature, it's slapstick in words. Consider this sentence, a little more than half way through the novel: "If you dressed Heber in a dark blue business suit, hung a Rush Limbaugh tie around his neck, and placed him in a bank, he'd look a little like Burl Ives after a Pritikin diet." Even outside the context of the plot, the sentence not only makes sense but provides a clear indication of the book's tone. It's both irreverent and dependent on the reader being familiar with varying cultural references (Limbaugh, Ives, the Pritikin diet). The 75-year-old bishop of Short Creek ("15 or so . . . wives, 43 children, and 289 Grandchildren and umpteen great-grandchildren") wants the town's sheriff, Heber Dean Smith, to handle the sale of the document containing Smith's final prophecy. He also wants the sheriff to take more wives; Smith, to the bishop's chagrin, is satisfied with one, Zinny. On the other side, C.J. Thomas, a reporter for the Courier & Mail, "the only anti-establishmentarian newspaper between Denver and San Francisco" and rival of "the church owned Deseret Call," is sent by the publisher to deliver the money. Thomas isn't real happy about the assignment, having more fun doing other things (when we first meet him he's with "A butt-naked coed . . . He'd picked up . . . that evening at a Jazz game"). There are varying subplots, a key one involving a woman who believes "being a wife to a good Mormon was as boring as sorting socks" and that the culture she's a part of believes "to be childless was a sin akin to drunkenness" and that "barren women were to be pitied." And there's Rose Lee, who was divorced after five years of marriage by "Bishop-to-be DeKay LaMott." The problems started when Rose Lee received what DeKay called "filthy pornography." She had "absent-mindedly signed a petition [for the Arizona Women's Alliance] in the Kingman Mall, having no idea what it was for, but the solicitor had a cute butt . . . That act had got her on a mailing list. To make ends meet, AWA sold the mailing list which fell into the hands of some very unsavory companies who offered mail order marital aids, discount phone sex, and some pretty racy bed gear." As is typical of literary farce (think of Joseph Heller's Catch 22 or Shakespeare's "A Midsummer's Night Dream") subtlety isn't a virtue here. The farce is effective or not effective much the same way as a stand-up comedian's routine. The jokes accumulate, and even if one isn't particularly funny the audience laughs because of the momentum built up by previous lines. Humor, of course, is also like beauty, in the eye of the beholder. By the time, close to the end of the book, we learn exactly what the final prophecy of Joseph Smith says, some readers may be disappointed because it's not the least bit farcical. It's serious but certain to displease both devout members of the Mormon church and residents of Colorado City. For Grimmett The Wives of Short Creek is both a continuation of and a significant departure from the themes he explored in his 2001 novel, The Ferry Women, which was narrated by a fictional wife of John D. Lee, one of the leaders of the gang of murderers who killed more than 120 men, women, and children at the Mountain Meadows massacre in 1857. That novel was a serious and convincing exploration of polygamy (Lee had 15 wives) and the effect it had on one of the wives. This new novel is, of course, intended to make us laugh. And the laughs should be guffaws, not snickers or quiet and knowing smiles. This is farce. ----- 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 #133 ******************************