From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #145 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 Monday, September 8 2003 Volume 02 : Number 145 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 09:44:29 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Caffeinated Drinks Jeff Needle wrote: > Those of us with diabetes had to go through some sort of transitional period > wrt Diet Coke. My late mother started by drinking Tab, a truly vile product > at the time. Just awful. Compared to what was available back in the "good > old days," Diet Coke is delicious. I don't know what "good old days" you're talking about, but the golden age of nonsugar drinks was in the days of cyclamates, a type of artificial sweetener that actually tasted good. It was one of the first substances that was administered to rats in megadoses, caused them cancer, then outlawed on the assumption that that proved it would cause cancer in humans. This moment of cultural insanity has been enshrined in a science fiction novel which is a clever take-off on Dante's Inferno. The book, by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, is called _Inferno_. The main character, a science fiction author, dies in a satirical scene with Isaac Asimov, is thrust down to Dante's hell, and spends the rest of the book trying to escape. One of the first cursed souls he runs across is a person who had campaigned in this life to outlaw cyclamates. That individual's punishment was to be morbidly obese for eternity. It's a great satire that nonetheless ends up making a touching, thought-provoking point at the end, and I recommend it. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 11:55:41 -0400 From: "Tony Markham" Subject: RE: [AML] _Irreantum_ Issue on Romance Barbara Hume wrote: The fact that 55% of the paperback market in the country is > romance tells you that there is a market. Somewhere I remember a line from Nathaniel Hawthorne complaining about the "damned mob of scribbling women" who were, in his day, sucking up all the oxygen and making it difficult for him to both find a market and make enough to live on. It's something that I guess will always be with us. Look at the current state of Mormon film and literature. Those who have the greatest financial success are not the ones who will leave the greatest cultural legacy. Chin up, head high, Dutcher. And as for those endless streams of romance writers, read more Hawthorne and get a clue. Tony Markham - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 12:01:25 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] Caffeinated Drinks At 07:35 AM 9/3/03 -0700, you wrote: >Those of us with diabetes had to go through some sort of transitional period >wrt Diet Coke. My late mother started by drinking Tab, a truly vile product >at the time. Just awful. Compared to what was available back in the "good >old days," Diet Coke is delicious. I drink the stuff because I like the taste of it. It's the only soft drink I do like. So I guess I'm lucky that I happen to hate the taste of the sugared sodas. Non-caffeine Diet Coke is okay in bottles, but ghastly in cans. Of course, if you took everything bad or useless out of sodas, you'd have water, which is what we should be drinking anyway. But it doesn't taste as good. Actually, I used to like Tab, but it was considered a ladies' drink. So Coke marketing created a new product and geared the advertising to men. Well, that commercial with Lucky Vanouse showed a real man gulping it, but the appeal there was certainly to those of us on the distaff side. How does this tie in to Mormon lit? Um, Mormon lit is considered wimpy, so we need to create a new Mormon lit that will appeal to macho types? barbara - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 12:22:46 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] Perceptions of Errors (clarified) At 09:14 PM 9/2/03 -0700, you wrote: >. I think that they are called in part because of >some measure of righteousness and ability to seek out the Spirit, but they >are also chosen for their managerial/leadership experience and ability. > They may even be the best men for the job (though does God always call the >best person for the job, or does he call someone and then give them the >opportunity to eventually become the best person for the job?). I've heard the saying that God doesn't call the qualified--He qualifies the called. barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:13:34 -0700 From: "LauraMaery (Gold) Post" Subject: Re: [AML] Box Office Report 22 Aug. 03 Paris wrote: >He had ... turned his life over to God. And God ruined it for him. I guess some times you >just can't win. Please tell me this is the first line of your next novel! If so, dibs on the first copy off the press! - --lauramaery - --------- OUR NEWEST WRITING PROJECT: Homeschooling Step by Step, Prima Publishing, Spring 2002. Everything you need to know about how to homeschool legally and effectively! How does your state rank? What's your child's learning style? What about college? Find teaching tips, teaching strategies, and more than 100 solutions to homeschooling's toughest problems! - --------- A message from LauraMaery (Gold) Post Web site: E-mail reply: - --------- . - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 14:37:24 -0600 From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Books by GAs - ----- Original Message ----- From: > >From Jana Riess: > > On another front -- I've been with PW now for 4 years ***I'll bite. What or who is PW? *** and I still find > myself deeply troubled about some aspects of the religion book world. Boy, I could > tell some stories! ...snip... > Just because there is a market > for something does not mean that it is right to publish it. I've come out > strongly a couple of times in meetings with publishers, arguing about the ethics > of a particular project. Sometimes they agree, and admit that they feel > uncomfortable about it themselves. But they also have to think about which > projects are going to keep the lights on and pay their salaries. Publishing is a > tough business. > > As for GA books, I don't think it's very different from what you see in other > religions. I've just been inundated with pope books to celebrate JPII's > silver jubilee, and with Mother Teresa books to coincide with her canonization. > And yes, their organizations get a nice cut. The difference there is that > Roman Catholic clergy do not benefit personally, having taken vows of poverty. > For GAs, a better comparison might be with Bishop T.D. Jakes, or Billy Graham, > or John Hagee. They live quite nicely off the royalties from their books, and > feel that they have earned it. Maybe the difference is that they have built > their own reputations, whereas GAs -- as you say -- capitalize on their > position in the Church to fuel sales. > > No easy answer here. I guess I would just say that it all looks a lot more > complicated once you find yourself implicated in it. > Jana Riess > Yes publishing must be a tough business; however, I'm sure you'll agree that writing from the perspective of an unknown, unpublished writer, has got to be at least a hundred times tougher. I'm not upset that the GA's get a better than average shot at publication. I don't buy all their books but I do buy the ones that interest me. It does make me mad that non-writers who have celebrity on their side, can write poorly, and have an instant high volume or even best seller on their hands. To name a few: Any of the Osmonds Monica Lewinsky Linda Tripp Ken Star Hillary and Bill Clinton The other unfortunate fact is that any convicted serial killer or rapist could write a memoir, and people would stand in line to buy it. I wonder how many best sellers have come from authors on Death row? Just because this kind of author is a guaranty of a best seller doesn't mean that a responsible publisher should automatically publish their work. I guess the buyers of books will always determine their content. And they will keep on seeking the sensational even if the work falls short of their literary expectations. I guess I'm just frustrated. I get upset when I find out that the average read for a manuscript that took its author months or even years to produce, and finally makes it into the slush pile, is about 4 seconds. (A publisher's assistant told me this.) And then, most of the publishers don't send it back even if you include the SASE. I wonder if they cash in the unused postage at the post office? Bill Willson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 17:44:03 +1000 From: "Clifford M Dubery" Subject: [AML] RE: Cost of Writing Openly There are avenues for you to use to test your stories, have them critiqued by Mormons, at least some of whom are in good standing (I'm certain that that doesn't apply to our members here:)). So use them and see what some informed opinion can do to help your story to get published. Your fears may or may not be grounded, they sound familiar with recent historical events in Utah, in a concatenated paragraph, but just move on, go groups.yahoo.com and register with D Michael Martindale's groups Worldsmiths or www.wwno.com\worldsmiths with the emphasis on LDS, or even ask this group. Cheers Clifford M Dubery Frankston, Victoria, Australia - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 07:28:20 -0400 From: Sam Brown Subject: [AML] Re: BofM Movie Anticipated Hello, I went to the website based on the thread on AML, and I CANNOT WAIT TO SEE THIS MOVIE. I should comment that my interest in it is not particularly cinematic, as it would appear from the trailer that the film is amateurish and stilted at best. But as an avid purveyor of kitsch, camp, and popular culture, I am fascinated by this movie as a sociological object and will force myself to sit still for 2.5 hours. On a whim, my wife and I went to a Renaissance Faire last week, which was one of the most enrichingly bizarre experiences of the last several years. I hope that this Book of Mormon movie will be similarly powerful for us. There's something about the unselfconscious aspirations of pre-moderns in our midst that I find both complex and compelling. A scholar at UofU, I think her name is Colleen Daniels, has written extensively on religious material culture, and I think this movie would fit well next to her Jesus bumperstickers and T-shirts, the day-glow velour Passion images, and the crucifix key chains. While part of me realizes that if any of my non-Mormon peers hears of this movie it will be a minor embarrassment and a major obstacle to their positive feelings for the church, I cannot wait to indulge. I think I may learn some things about our culture. Hopefully they weren't too horribly racist about this Amerind skin tone problem, as that would turn what could have been a revisiting of "Saturday's Warrior" into a public relations debacle for the church. - -- Yours, Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital sam@vecna.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 16:30:55 -0600 From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] BofM Movie Anticipated What's interesting here is the way in which various people I know are = anticipating whether or not they're going to like this movie. =20 Right now I'm teaching a religion class at BYU; most of the students = there anticipate liking the film. I'm also teaching my usual theatre = classes, and most of those students anticipate not liking it. But in = both sets of students there are dissenters either way, whose opinions, = I'm pleased to say, seem to be treated with respect. So far; that may = change when people have seen the film. I anticipate that some people who see the film will say that their faith = was strengthened by seeing it, and that others will say that those = peoples' emotions have been manipulated, and that their response was not = actually spiritual, but emotional. I'm of two minds on this point. On = the one hand, I don't get it when people say they saw some particular = work of institutional Mormon art and their 'faith was strengthened.' I = tend to think those people probably had a pretty strong faith to begin = with. Seeing some film or play or attending some concert probably = didn't affect it much. I tend to think that they just had a positive = emotional response to a work that used a variety of emotion-inducing = techniques to provide them with one, that they felt a strong = identification with other people in the theatre having a similar = response. But, on the other hand, to say 'you didn't really feel the = spirit, you were just fooled into thinking you did by an (unscrupulous?) = artist' seems like kind of a rotten thing to say to our brothers and = sisters. =20 I do think it unlikely that the Book of Mormon film will increase my = faith, or that I will have a positive emotional response to it. I hope = I'm wrong, because I do feel an obligation to see this film, and I would = rather like it than dislike it. But I suspect that after seeing this = film, I will feel grumpy, and misanthropic, and that I will foster = unkind and uncharitable thoughts towards at least some of my brothers = and sisters, including those who made the film, and also including those = who enjoyed it. So I'm a little concerned, because I think the unkind = and uncharitable thoughts I'm anticipating fostering will damn me, if I = don't repent from them. So I anticipate that my reaction to this film = will move me personally further from, instead of closer to, exaltation. I think that when the 13th article of faith says that if there is = anything 'virtuous, lovely, of good report or praiseworthy' we should = seek after it, it implies that 'virtuous' and 'lovely' are not = necessarily the same thing. I do believe that the makers of the Book of = Mormon film intend to make a virtuous film. They probably will succeed. = I think they also want to make a lovely film. Based on the trailer, = they haven't succeeded there. But maybe the film's better than that. I = hope so. =20 I do not think that the Book of Mormon film will destroy the Church. I = do think that at least some people who see it will be less inclined to = study the Book of Mormon as a result, and that therefore at least some = people who might have joined the Church won't. This does not concern me = much, because I think not liking the Book of Mormon film does not = preclude someone from accepting the gospel in the Spirit World. I do = also think that some people will see the film, and as a result = investigate the Church and possibly join it. I do not think that the = number of people in either group will be a large one. I do not believe = that the making of a film will have any sort of huge impact one way or = another on the progress of the stone cut out of the mountain without = hands. It takes hands to make a film. I have not waited my whole life with bated breath to see a Book of = Mormon film. I have seen quite a number of Bible films (we watched them = as a family), and I think mostly they're pretty funny. Not all; I love = the Zeffirelli Jesus of Nazareth, for example. I think, again based on = the trailers, that my most likely reaction to the Book of Mormon film = will be to think it's funny. I suspect that for some people, this = locates me spiritually in the Great and Spacious building. I don't know = that they're wrong. =20 Probably, this is a film I shouldn't see, and a film I certainly = shouldn't review on AML-List. I plan to see it anyway, and I also plan = to review it. I will make no effort to be positive, or to look for the = good in it, nor will I try to be excessively negative. I don't plan to = treat it any differently than I would any other film. I plan to point = out what I perceive to be its strengths and weaknesses. I hope that's = okay with everyone. Over the past few weeks, I have seen some wonderful films, faith = affirming, powerful, truthful, spiritually uplifting films. A few I = might mention would include Barbershop, Rabbit-proof Fence, The Matrix = Reloaded. So that's my standard. Eric Samuelsen =20 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 17:59:14 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Jeff PROFITT, _Blue Collar Actor_ (Movie Review) Barbara Hume wrote: > At 04:15 PM 8/30/03 -0500, you wrote: > >> Viewers with a particularly artistic bent may find that the film's >> biggest >> flaw is its rather happy ending. The ending will probably please most >> viewers, but may seem unearned or insufficiently grim to those who >> aspire to >> be writers. > > > Please! Not all of us who aspire to be (or are) writers think that a > depressing ending is necessary. Please! Let's not start this again. Good writers don't insist on depressing endings. We only insist on _earned_ happy endings. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:04:58 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Convictions of Otherness Jacob Proffitt wrote: > Interesting. For the years of his ministry, He didn't do much but > teach. It'd be easy to call him a teacher, a minister, an itinerant, > but we never see him building anything (except people :). Can you be a > carpenter if you don't build anything? Can you be a writer if you don't > write anything? Professions are tricky, particularly when forced to > assume based on surroundings and tradition. > > Jacob Proffitt > > [MOD: I'm going to save the extra post to add a comment here. SF author Gene > Wolfe comments, in one of his essays, that the only thing we have any record > of Jesus actually "making" as a carpenter was a whip. Interesting...] But we also have absolutely no record of his life between the ages of 12 and 30. That's a lot of time to build a lot of wooden things--six times longer than the three years of his recorded mission. What do you think he was doing all that time? Of course he didn't act like a carpenter once his mission started. How many of our modern General Authorities continue with their occupation after being called? - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 09:55:27 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Cost of Writing Openly Matthew Durkee wrote: > For the time, my coping mechanism is simply to trust God that since I am > doing what I feel called to do, it will all work out in the end. It's > probably unlikely that I would be disciplined by the Church for telling > my stories as honestly as I can and with the best of intentions. But it > does worry me, and Michael's post really spoke to me. Unfortunately, > keeping a low profile is not the right option for all of us. And your post spoke right back to me. You expressed in vivid and personal terms what I've been trying to say. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 12:12:43 EDT From: PinkDiva@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Death of the Road Show? In a message dated 9/4/2003 9:15:55 PM Mountain Daylight Time, taitfam@houston.rr.com writes: > Is this what the rest > of you are seeing in your stakes? Do you even have roadshows anymore? Is the > road show a dead art in Mormondom? > > The roadshow is alive and well here in Littleton, Colorado. However, we do them in a unique way. We do the roadshow in one long day. Everyone gathers at the church in the morning. The theme is given out and the kids and leaders go to work writing the script (though much ends up being improvised), learning music (again, words are written to already composed music, mostly songs from musicals), rehearsing, doing sets, etc.. It's amazing how well they turn out - -- frankly, I think they're about as good as the road shows people work for months on. This eliminates problems with getting kids to rehearsals and months of headaches. They are a lot of fun and the stake center is packed when they're performed (the same evening). Lisa - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 09:05:44 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Uplifting Writing Bill Gardner wrote: > I'm curious too. I hear a lot of lip service about "exploration" in > literature but I think in some cases critics assume this means that the > author has no agenda at all and is just throwing a dictionary at a wall > and hoping the right words will stick to it, or, that good writing is > when theme development happens without any help from within the mind of > the author. If there are critics who think that, they are blithering idiots. My book _Brother Brigham_ was definitely an exploration. But I didn't sit down and bleed words onto the paper at random. I knew from the start who the characters were, what questions I would be asking, and where the story would go. What I didn't know was all the ways these things would impact my characters, or how they would react to them. I went in without preconceived notions about how a "good Latter-day Saint" should feel, or how he should handle the things that happened. I let the characters show me. > Oh, and > there are people who just want to read a good story and leave the > hoity-toidy notion of "exploration" to the smart people. That was offensive. We know there are people who are only interested in a good story. Sometimes I'm that person. I've enjoyed many a good story simply because it was a good story, even though it didn't offer any deep insights into the human condition. I enjoy the movie _It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World_, for heaven's sakes, which is about as undeep as you can get. All we want is to ALSO see stories that are explorations. We don't want to burn the "good stories" and replace them. We want everything to exist side by side. But those who are suspicious of actual thinking complain that we do want to burn the "good stories." Where they get this notion, I've no idea. If I see someone who consumes nothing but hamburgers and Coke every meal, I don't think I'm out of line if I hold the opinion that this person really ought to add a little more substance to his diet. I feel the same way about literature. Unpretentious stories (if good) can be wonderful things. I don't want to get rid of them. But I think people who only read unchallenging literature ought to add a little substance to their literary diet now and then. But that suggestion gets twisted into the notion that I want to burn the unchallenging books and force everyone to read what I like. How much longer do I have to endure this distortion of what I'm really saying? Nonetheless, the hamburger eater will take offense when I suggest he try something a little more nutritious now and then, and so will the reader of unchallenging books. Both will accuse me of trying to force something on them. I can only walk away shaking my head at their folly. At which point they'll accuse me of being an elitist snob. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #145 ******************************