From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #233 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, December 22 2003 Volume 02 : Number 233 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:20:34 -0700 From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: [AML] Re: Another Review of Angels etc. [MOD: Yes, we're back online and will be throughout the holidays. My bad. A few to go out today, others starting on Monday. --Jonathan Langford] Here's another interesting review: (this time only with one brief excerpt, I promise. Although on the other review I posted less than half the review, adn I thought that would be okay - but I admit I am ignorant on how much equals fair use. My bad). http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/blog/index.asp Brief excerpt: "The most striking aspect of Kushner's play is that his characters learn nothing through their suffering, except to increase the volume (in both senses) of their complaints. The strict Mormon learns he is gay -- one of evenings many inevitable cliches -- but this leaves him feeling exactly what he felt when he was a stric Mormon: that he is a bad person. Another tired cliche is the fact that the gay-baiting, humanity-hating Roy Cohn has AIDS, a discovery which naturally has no impact on his self-understanding. And why should it, since he is only in the play to provide a pin cushion for the whiny playwright who loathes him." - --ivan wolfe - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:38:55 -0700 From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: [AML] What Is Censorship? (was: The Envious Critic) > I still don't see how one person's opinion is artistic freedom and > another person's opinion is censorship. I recall seeing both Eric's > and my comments posted on this list. > > Scott Parkin This all gets down to what Censorhip really is. Can censorship only be done by the government? For example, some who have worked for the Church have cried "censorship" when the Ensign won't publish certain stories. Yet Orson Scott Card in his book A Storyteller in Zion to argue that the Church has a certain image it want to project, and just because they refused to publish certain stories he wrote does not mean censorship - it means that the stories didn't fit with the image the church wanted to project. You can argue that the image is wronge (perhaps), but OSC says you can't call it censorhip. Or, I am reminded of the recent Dixie Chicks flap. Their opinions are protected, but when certain DJs decide to exercist their right to protest by not playing their CDs, that is called "Censorship" despite the fact no goverment agency prompted it. The DJs said they just didn't want to associate themselves with those political opinions. (Note I am not discussing the decision by some large corporations to ban the DCs from all their radio stations - that's a different case than the individual DJs who made the decision - though even then I would question whether it was really censorship). Other examples I've heard are whenever some people protest the content of a movie - they are accused of censorhip, even if all they have asked is for a chance to rebut the content, not ban it outright. I am actually conflicted on this issue, so I offer no solutions now, though I think I have a tenative one. Maybe later I'll spend some time trying to write it down in a comprehensible form. Any thoughts? - --ivan wolfe - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 23:05:00 -0700 From: "Nan P. McCulloch" Subject: Re: [AML] KUSHNER, _Angels in America_ While several list members see _Angels in America_as a work primarily about homosexuality, I still see it as having a stronger underlying political (anti-conservative) theme. I agree with much in this NR review. Nan McCulloch - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:19:14 -0500 From: Sam Brown Subject: [AML] AVERY, _From Mission to Madness_ (Review) Hello, >From Mission to Madness Valeen Tippets Avery University of Illinois Press, 1998 348 pages I bought this book because I respect the author, a professional historian from Arizona who coauthored the seminal biography of the widow of the founding prophet of Mormonism, Emma Hale Smith Bidamon. I finished this book because the story was one of the most compelling I've read in over a decade. I would recommend this biography above any in Mormon Studies except perhaps Arrington's Brigham and Avery and Newell's Emma, and frankly I find this character more interesting than those other, more prominent figures. The subject is David Hyrum Smith, the posthumous child of the lynched Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr. According to reliable sources, David's father informed his intimates as he left for the jail that would see his murder that his last son, to be born several months after his death, would rise up to lead the Lord's people. Though similar pronouncements had applied to Hyrum Smith, the prophet's brother, and Joseph III, the prophet's firstborn son, David was slated to be a leader of the Mormon Church. David started life in the chaos of Nauvoo, Illinois, a town approximately the size of Chicago at the time (11,000-15,000 in the early 1840s). He knew it only after its abandonment (at gunpoint) by the main body of the Mormon Church, who fled to Utah under the direction of Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, Jr.'s spiritual and theological heir and the ultimate winner of the succession crisis that ensued on the Prophet's death. David grew up in the shadow of his powerful but loving mother, Emma Hale Smith, who-judging from the rhetoric of the so-called Brighamite LDS Church-was the greatest threat to Brigham Young's hold on the main body of Mormon believers. While she has long been vilified by Young's followers as a domineering and deceitful woman who manipulated her children into denying their prophetic birthright, the picture we gather from David's description (corroborated by Avery and Newell's excellent biography) is of a strong-willed but kind woman who endured a long and difficult life that would leave the majority of us pleading for a quick death. After Joseph Smith's death, Emma married a prominent Nauvoo immigrant, "Major" Lewis Bidamon, who ultimately offered her the counterpoint to Mormon polygamy: he sired a child with a mistress, a boy whom Emma welcomed into her home to raise as a grandson. David, a sensitive soul with a penchant for florid poetry, rapidly found his place in the church his older brother finally chose to lead, the so-called Reorganization or Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (RLDS). His role, self-described, was as a "wanderer, outward bound," while he was known by his RLDS colleagues (and Utah LDS relatives) as a poet, painter, lyricist and orator. He spent his brief adult life of sanity in the mission field, seeking converts from the main body of Mormonism and strengthening the RLDS community. Though he was lonely on these missions, he was more content than at home, where his spotty work as a portrait painter did little to meet the economic necessities of life on the Illinois frontier. The second half of David's life is lost in the swirling mists of insanity, a condition that came into sharp focus as he collapsed on a mission to Utah at age 32. His family, including his devoted wife Clara, his older brother Joseph, and his abiding mother Emma, were unable to keep him at home as he became progressively more agitated and confused. The great poet of the RLDS church lapsed into the mad mutterings of a lapsed prophet, and his brother institutionalized him with considerable reluctance. As a physician, a tantalizing project for me, appropriately avoided by Avery, is to diagnose David in contemporary terms. The details we have are that he suffered from "brain fever" which was associated with a "nervous breakdown" that evolved into "chronic mania," requiring his institutionalization at the Elgin Asylum for the Insane in Elgin, Illinois, the original hometown of Borden's condensed milk factory. Avery provides helpful hints in the form of David's correspondence while at the institution, which are more useful than the terse, uninformative notes from the Asylum's staff. His behavior-delusions; intermittent delirium; forced, repetitive, often nonsensical writing-suggest a psychotic disorder, either schizophrenia or psychotic depression. Schizophrenia is more consistent with his unremitting course, though the relatively late age of onset, and his history of moderately successful life prior to it argue against the diagnosis. Aspects of his behavior toward his f! amily and his correspondence remind me of patients who have had severe frontal lobe or limbic damage, such as can occur with herpes or other viral encephalitis. If it is true that he had high temperature at the time of his initial mental collapse, it might suggest that he suffered from encephalitis, though it is also possible, given his prior history of depression, difficulty forming intimate relationships, and his histrionic writings, that he simply had a bout of e.g. influenza at the time that his psychotic disorder reached the threshold of disability. I believe that if we could examine David today, we would have a diagnosis within a week, and I suspect it would be schizophrenia. As it is, we will likely never know. The hints we have of his eventual demise, diabetes and "Bright's disease," (an obsolete term unlikely to reflect his actual condition) suggest a miserable, slow death from kidney failure or diabetic coma, the two most likely conditions, though I am specula! ting here, and he could easily have died painlessly from an infarction (heart attack or stroke). Avery has a readable, unobtrusive style that does an able job of letting the story speak for itself. She obviously feels great affection for this man, and it leads her to an apparent infatuation with his early, frankly awkward poetry, with praise out of proportion to literary merit. I found his poems most useful for establishing his histrionic, colorful character before his visible mental illness, and I think the book would have been better with fewer examples of his early writing. Poor David was an amateurish poet whose poems do not stand on their own, despite his having a volume of them published by the RLDS press. The power and beauty of the life and its biography are David's dashed hopes and expectations, the loss of his heroic destiny. He was the Sonnenkind, the last son of the Mormon Prophet, who wandered through Utah considering whether he could seize control (through his brother and his RLDS organization) of Young's vast empire, while he was both jealous of and intimidated by the Lion of the Lord. Then, when he is finally making some headway (and experimenting with spiritualism as he discovers that Emma has lied to him about his father's sexual/marital habits), he loses his sanity, becoming little more than a curio installed in an Illinois asylum, the object of occasional voyeuristic visits by LDS and RLDS alike, trying to confirm the perdition of the Prophet's special son. David's is not the only tragic life in this book. His wife Clara waited almost thirty years for the return of her husband, whose paranoid delusions led him to accuse her of infidelity and betrayal. Crushed by overwhelming poverty, she spent his healthy life fighting for her portion of the few dollars he managed to send home during his missionary tours and his diseased life waiting for him to be recover his sanity. We know her sadness only peripherally, in David's confusing and haunting letters and the pastoral counsel from her brother-in-law and Prophet, Joseph III. In another strain, David's closest friend, Charles "Charley" Jensen, appears to have suffered the lonely celibacy of a religious homosexual in a traditional church. Avery deals with this complex topic tastefully, and it is a testament to David's premorbid kindness that he maintained their intimate relationship over decades. Charley remained devoted to him through the end, even trying once to care for him, though, unfortunately that episode passed without documentation, and we can only imagine the heartbreak he experienced at seeing his friend so disabled mentally. Beyond the moving human drama, Avery's biography provides an anecdotal suggestion of what can happen when leadership succession within a church is hereditary. The Utah Mormons gloated for over a decade that David was made a counselor in the First Presidency of the RLDS Church about the time he lost his mind. His older brother, Joseph III, ever hopeful, did not release him for twelve years. (The Utah LDS would do well to remember that the policy of no retirement for the top echelon of leaders has resulted in leaders governing from hospital rooms, to weak to stand before a congregation of believers.) Reading this book has confirmed, for me, that dynastic church governance is not an optimal approach, a fact-along with Joseph Smith's polygamy-the RLDS (now Communities of Christ) have recently acknowledged as they move further toward the Protestant mainstream. As a Utah Mormon (and grandson of Brigham Young), I am sad that we do not have more of a tradition of respect for and knowledge of Joseph Smith, Jr.'s children. The LDS church has not evolved much from prior accusations that Emma and Joseph III either imprisoned David for admitting that the Mormon Prophet practiced polygamy or that they caused his insanity by their lies about his behavior and theology. We have done little to remember the sad plight of our founding prophet's children. Avery's excellent biography takes us one step closer to understanding their fates and embracing our shared heritage. - -- Yours, Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital sam@vecna.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:16:55 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Deseret News: "Simpsons" Theology Saturday, December 13, 2003 Sun-Doh! School =97 Teachers use pop culture to appeal to masses=20 By Elaine Jarvik Deseret Morning News They are, at first blush, unlikely spiritual guides =97 the bratty=20 boy, the clueless dad, the mom with the tilting spire of blue hair. But=20 look closely at the Simpsons, says Debbie Buese, and you'll see a family=20 that can illuminate life's profound questions. Buese, who attends=20 St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Salt Lake City, is one of several Utah=20 Sunday school teachers who have used the Simpsons as the jumping-off point=20 for discussions about theological and moral questions. Questions about=20 angels, hell, the power of prayer in the face of a crummy report card. For teenagers, it's a "wonderful doorway" to explore issues of=20 faith, says Dori Marshall, director of Christian education at Cottonwood=20 Presbyterian Church. To those who might question using such a secular =97=20 some might say sacrilegious =97 TV sitcom as a teaching tool, Marshall=20 points to the parables of the New Testament. "When we think about 2,000=20 years ago and of Jesus taking people out on a hillside to talk to them, he=20 was meeting them where they live. Sometimes that's the only way we can=20 learn: with language and situations we can understand." The classes are based on "The Gospel According to The Simpsons," by=20 Mark I. Pinsky, and its companion piece, a group study guide published=20 last year. Pinsky covers religion for the Orlando Sentinel. "Entry-level religion" is what professor Robert Thompson of Syracuse=20 University calls this use of pop culture to reach people who might=20 otherwise shy away from theological discussions. In the intro to his study=20 guide, Pinsky admits this sometimes has its downside. "On the one hand,"=20 he writes, "resorting to such lowest-common-denominator vehicles has the=20 aroma of desperation on the part of organized religion. It is further=20 evidence =97 if any more is needed =97 of the evaporating attention span of=20 most Americans, and of the general dumbing down of serious discourse." On the other hand, it works. The list of churches and schools using=20 the Simpsons and Pinsky's book includes a Baptist Church in Canada, a=20 protestant chaplain on a U.S. Air Force base in Turkey, a Methodist church=20 in Ohio, a Christian fellowship at Boston University and lots of=20 Presbyterian churches (the book is published by Westminster Knox Press, a=20 Presbyterian publishing house in Louisville, Ky). The Simpsons, Pinsky argues, are a lot more spiritual than they=20 might seem. "In many ways," writes Pinsky in "The Gospel According to the=20 Simpsons," Bart and his family are "both defined and circumscribed by=20 religion." They attend church every Sunday, say grace before meals, and,=20 when faced with crises, turn to God and pray aloud. In fact, he argues, Christians and Christianity are more a part of=20 The Simpsons "than of any other prime-time network sitcom or drama,=20 excluding shows specifically devoted to religion such as 'Touched by an=20 Angel' and 'Seventh Heaven.' " Not that Homer doesn't continually try to=20 bargain with God, and try to cheat and lie to his fellowman. Not that he=20 doesn't make fun of his neighbor, born-again Ned Flanders. St. Paul's Sunday school teacher Buese says that when she first=20 watched the Simpsons with her own children years ago she only saw bits and=20 pieces =97 and found it offensive. "You can't watch a minute or two of Homer=20 or Bart and like them," she says. It takes a whole episode, or several=20 episodes, to understand the questions the show raises and the morality it=20 underscores. Besides, Buese says, there's the added benefit of realizing=20 the universality of the show and its characters. "Homer might be sitting=20 next to you at church. And there are things in those episodes that are=20 painfully true." On a recent Sunday morning, Buese's class watched a Simpson episode=20 called "Lisa the Skeptic," in which Bart's 8-year-old sister unearths, at=20 the site of a future shopping mall, what looks like the skeleton of an=20 angel. In the mayhem that ensues, the townspeople of Springfield turn to=20 the artifact for miracles, and Homer turns it into a pay-per-view shrine. Lisa, though, thinks the whole thing is a bunch of bunk, and says=20 she feels sorry for her gullible neighbors and her gullible family. To=20 which her mother replies: "There has to be more to life than just what we=20 see. If you can't make a leap of faith now and then, I feel sorry for=20 you." Lisa turns to the town's scientist for an answer. To which, the=20 evangelical Ned Flanders replies, "Science is like a blabbermouth who=20 ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. Well, I say there are some=20 things we don't want to know =97 important things." In a discussion afterwards, Buese's class of 14-year-olds talked=20 about the questions the show raised. Do they believe in angels? Would an=20 angel leave a skeleton? Is it possible to be a person of science and a=20 person of faith? What does it mean in Proverbs 14:15, "The simple believe=20 everything, but the clever consider their steps"? Like most teenagers, says Peter Harris, when he reads the Bible he=20 sometimes thinks "this doesn't really apply to me." But the Simpson=20 family's comical, sometimes poignant, everyday clashes with morality and=20 faith "helps put a new perspective on what you believe," says Peter, a=20 freshman at Judge Memorial High School. The show sometimes provides more questions than answers, and that's=20 fine, says Cottonwood Presbyterian's Marshall. "I've always been=20 encouraged to question and discover," she says. "It's only through=20 questioning and discovery that we're able to internalize our own theology=20 that sustains us . . . When you're face to face with teenagers, I think=20 the last thing you can do and still be authentic is say you can't=20 question." "We talk openly about times when our faith is dry," adds Buese about=20 her Sunday School class. "That's acceptable, certainly, in a lifelong=20 relationship with God." E-MAIL: jarvik@desnews.com =A9 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/ - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:12:11 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] SL Tribune: Scholars See Christian Values in Tolkien [MOD: Oh, the urge to comment... --Jonathan Langford] SATURDAY December 13, 2003 Scholars see Christian values in Tolkien's 'Lord of the=20 Rings'=20 Self-sacrifice by characters such as Gandalf,=20 above, Aragorn and Sam Gamgee reflect Christian=20 values.=20 By Peggy Fletcher Stack=20 The Salt Lake Tribune=20 Harry Potter battles bad guys and black magic, but=20 the kid wizard's story is still too profane for many=20 Christians.=20 What irks them is that young Harry has supernatural=20 powers without God. That makes his story less than=20 inspirational for them, if not downright blasphemous.=20 Why, then, have so many Christians embraced J.R.R.=20 Tolkien's epic fantasy, Lord of the Rings? Tolkien's=20 1,500-page trilogy has plenty of wizards, elves and=20 magic, and it doesn't mention deity. It has no prayers,=20 no rituals, no sacred scriptures and no clearly=20 spelled-out dogma.=20 Nor has God shown up in Peter Jackson's film=20 version, the last installment of which is coming out=20 next week.=20 That didn't stop Christianity Today, the country's=20 premier Evangelical magazine, from ranking Lord of the Rings among the top 10 Christian books of the 20th=20 century. And a Dutch church is planning to celebrate a "Lord of the Rings" Mass to coincide with new film.=20 The answer for some is simple: Tolkien was a devout=20 Roman Catholic.=20 And Lord of the Rings, which has sold more than 100=20 million copies since its publication in 1954-55, is=20 peppered with Christian notions -- death and=20 resurrection, the power of humility, forgiveness of=20 evil, the temptation of sin and pride, life has purpose,=20 the importance of moral responsibility and that good=20 will ultimately triumph over evil.=20 That's not to say Rings was meant as an evangelistic=20 tool. Or as simple allegory.=20 "I dislike allegory when I smell it," Tolkien told=20 his friends. He preferred textured tales to the simple one-on-one correspondences of characters in such books as The Chronicles of Narnia by his good friend, C.S.=20 Lewis.=20 He believed characters should be fully fleshed and=20 ideas rich enough to suggest various meanings.=20 That is clearly the case in the Rings trilogy, says=20 Steven Walker, who teaches a class in Christian fantasy=20 at Brigham Young University.=20 "What Tolkien does best is to sketch people and=20 ideas out for you and then leave it open for you to=20 finish the picture yourself," says Walker. "He doesn't present articles of faith so much as principles revealed=20 in the narrative. It's not long before you are thinking=20 about Middle-Earth as an extension of your own=20 experience."=20 Lord of the Rings lays out the many adventures of=20 Frodo, a humble creature of a mythic land known as=20 Middle-Earth who leads a band of elves, dwarves and=20 humans in battle against the dark lord, Sauron. Frodo=20 has a magic ring, which gives its owner complete world domination, and Sauron wants it. Frodo reluctantly=20 embarks on an arduous journey to destroy the ring in the=20 fires of Mount Doom, where he encounters people,=20 temptations and battles along the way.=20 There are no Christ-figures in Lord of the Rings,=20 says the Rev. Adam Linton of Good Shepherd Episcopal=20 Church in Ogden. But acts of self-sacrifice by the=20 wizard Gandalf, the human, Aragorn, and the hobbit, Sam=20 Gamgee, "are Christlike."=20 These actions exemplify the words of Jesus: "Greater=20 love hath any man than this, that a man lay down his=20 life for his friends."=20 Linton, who has studied Tolkien for several decades,=20 sees an array of spiritual messages in the books,=20 including reverence for creation, delight in its=20 diversity, acceptance of life's risks and limits,=20 nonpossessiveness, loyalty and the call to foster a=20 re-mythologized vision of the world. He will present his=20 understanding of Tolkien in a spring 2004 lecture,=20 "Middle-Earth Spirituality," for Utah's Episcopal=20 Diocese.=20 In the trilogy, the ring is a particularly potent=20 symbol, open to multiple interpretations.=20 It is most commonly seen as the seduction of pride,=20 power or domination, bending others to your will, or=20 possessiveness. Some have also suggested it represents the buildup of nuclear weapons.=20 One recent author, Tom Shippley, [MOD: Ha! Shippey, not Shippley!] has= argued that the=20 ring symbolizes human addictions, some of which may make=20 life better in the beginning but ultimately destroy a=20 person's will and destiny.=20 Lord of the Ring's elaborate tale has echoes of=20 Norse myths that Tolkien studied at Oxford. Its=20 characters take up their heroic quest without guarantee=20 of success. They respect nature and magic, and their=20 goodness does not come from God or Jesus Christ.=20 But in these myths, heroes are leaders at the top of=20 the social ladder. Power is accomplishment, much sought=20 after. Success in battle is tantamount, but sooner or=20 later the "ice trolls will overcome you. Every human=20 effort is doomed," says Walker. Valor is maintaining=20 integrity in the midst of defeat.=20 The Christian message is exactly the opposite.=20 It claims that God and goodness will prevail, that=20 the son of a carpenter became Christ the king and the=20 meek will inherit the Earth.=20 "One of the great ironies in Tolkien is that you=20 have all these grand battle scenes but at the center of=20 the action are these two little hobbits inching their=20 way along," Linton says.=20 The trilogy also could be read as a text on=20 Christian pacifism.=20 Frodo comes from a place of peace, the shire. In his=20 drive to destroy the ring, he must take up weapons and develop "the disposition to fight," Walker says. By the=20 middle of the books, though, Frodo is putting off=20 weapons, refusing to hurt anybody, including the traitor=20 Gollum.=20 The refusal to kill an enemy is at the core of=20 Tolkien's Christianity, says Ralph Wood of Baylor=20 University in Waco, Texas.=20 "In pagan myths," says Wood, author of The Gospel=20 According to Tolkien, "the one thing you couldn't do was=20 forgive someone who was egregiously evil."=20 pstack@sltrib.com=20 =A9 Copyright 2003, The Salt Lake Tribune.=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/ - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:54:37 -0700 From: Jared Walters Subject: Re: [AML] Eric Samuelson on Singles Ward I just don't why after 2 years, the singles ward movie is still a heated topic with AML members. Believe me, there have been worse movies catering to a certain group of people that have come and gone. Some movies on paper look a like a flop from the get-go, but for whatever reason it gets released just at the right time and strikes a chord with it's core viewing group and becomes a sleeper hit. Kind of like, "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" where it seems like every young couple in America loves the thing, but at the same time you have offended Greeks and others who just despise the flick. In a perfect world, the most profoundly written and artistically creative movies will be profitable with Oscars to boot. But alas, that's hardly the case. You'll always have your "Titanic" excelling to ridiculous heights in commercial success while a movie like "Amistad" struggles to break even. I'm sure there are those who will disagree with my examples. That's o.k Just yesterday at work, I overheard a co-worker passionately trash "The Last Samurai" (a movie I quite liked despite some flaws). He went on for 10 minutes expressing his anger over how he felt let down or cheated somehow and that anyone who actually liked the movie had an extremely low IQ. Suddenly, he changes the subject and talks about how cool and funny last nights "South Park" episode which he watches every night and his recent purchase of yet another WWF Smackdown DVD. At this point, I was about to walk over and angrily confront him on ridiculing others for liking "The Last Samuarai" when his viewing habits hardly qualify him as a guest critic on Ebert and Roeper. But under great restraint, I just shrugged and laughed it off and went about my business. I guess my point is, that a person's reaction to a movie can be so different than ours to the point where we want to go postal on them, but in the end it's not worth the energy. If their opinion is gonna change, it will come on their own or not at all. Being a James Bond fan, I was afraid to admit that I preferred Sean Connery to Roger Moore because at the time Moore was the cat's meow for British coolness. Today, it's almost canon that Connery was the definitive Bond. 5 years from now, my friend at work may have a different take altogether on "The Last Samurai" What will be the consensus on "The Singles Ward" 10 years from now? It's anyone's guess. Movie karma is a strange thing. You have movies like "The Princess Bride" which are amazingly given new life long after they were D.O.A in theaters and popcorn fluff like "Armageddon" that tops the box office for its year, but seems to have fallen by the wayside in video sales and rentals. If "The Singles Ward" is as terrible as some of the members make it out to be then I think father time will give the movie its due whatever that may be. If you ask me the hoopla over "The Singles Ward" is much ado about nothing. The guys at Halestorm set out to make a movie scrounging up money on their own and achieved their goal. If anything, grassroots efforts like this should at least be admired even if we don't agree with the finished product. They deserve all the criticism they get, but there's no need for people to bet their lives and testimonies on their literary and artistic shortcomings. We're still in the beginning years of Mormon cinema. We have to expect to get some embarrassing entries like "Handcart" and "Day of Defense" early in the game. The main thing is there is no apparent slowdown of future Mormon movies in the works. We can only hope the concept of practice making perfect rings true for our would-be Spielbergs. [Jared Walters] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:59:43 -0800 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Eric Samuelsen on Singles Ward In the search for great cinema, I think we often forget that audiences go to movies to be entertained. This does not necessarily mean the same thing as we often think of in the term "great cinema." Shouldn't filmmakers consider the need to entertain in addition to considering what makes great cinema? Singles Ward was entertaining. Say what you will about its elements, it had a lot of humor, an engaging romance, and a positive resolution. These are elements that audiences enjoy. It has always made me somewhat incredulous to observe, both in Hollywood and on this List, that those who produce entertainment rarely see eye-to-eye with those whom they seek to entertain. Shouldn't we strive to be a little more in touch with our audience? Richard R. Hopkins - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 15:03:56 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Dialogue Literary Issue I've been waiting for someone else to bring this up, but... The latest issue of "Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought" (Volume 36, No. 2, Summer 2003) is largely devoted to Mormon literary art. It contains new short stories by, among others, Douglas Thayer, Margaret Blair Young, Todd Robert Petersen, and Levi Peterson. There's also a semi-serious essay by Robert Kirby and an essay on R-rated movies by Molly Bennion, and an essay on Neil LaBute by yours truly, based largely on reviews written for AML-List. Details can be found at: http://www.dialoguejournal.com And, if any of you are still interested in our discussion of art that is appropriate for your homes, there is a website called the Museum of Computer Art that is putting on a show in the Cork Gallery of Lincoln Center in New York City January 3-13. One of the participating artists is Alison Armstrong, who creates collages out of antique photographs. They're quite good. She is also our ward choir director and a very cool person. Details can be found at: http://moca.virtual.museum/guest/armstrong_72/armstrong01.htm R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com - --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 12:40:01 -0700 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] ARNETT, _Defending the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints_ (Review) Title: Defending the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I read a term in a book a few months "shaktipat." It refer to a guru = causing the kundalini process to start in a person simply by touching = them. I looked up that term on the internet and most of the articles I = found were written by nay-sayers and alarmists. It sounded just like = anti-mormon propaganda except with a hindu twist. That made me think. I guess there's a segment of society that chooses not to believe = anything and sets themselves up as prophets of logic and reason. = There's a lot of pride and arrogance involved. So I'm wondering why = bother to defend the Church? People are going to believe what they want = to believe. It doesn't matter about logic or esoteric sensations. It = people percieve their beleifs as being helpful to them, they're going to = stick with those beliefs. So why defend the Church? It seems futile. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #233 ******************************