From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Dialogue needs fiction Date: 31 Oct 2003 15:44:22 -0700 Margaret Young wrote: > I'm assuming Levi will answer this, but in case he doesn't, he and Karen > Maloney are the new editors. Karen Rosenbaum is the fiction editor. = I've > been helping edit fiction for the past year or so. May I just add to=3D > Levi's > note that we have particular need for quality fiction written by WOMEN. WIsh you'd said this sooner. I'd have sent my submission in under a female pseudonym. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Elizabeth Petty Bentley" Subject: Re: [AML] Marilyn Brown Novel Award Date: 31 Oct 2003 12:32:46 +0000 The follow-up question is Where? For those of us who have to make travel arrangements. Beth Bentley > >Thanks Darvell for asking, "When is the next Marilyn Brown Novel Award=3D > going >to be presented?" > We will present a thousand dollars to the next Marilyn Brown Novel Award winner on February 23, 2004, or whenever the AML luncheon meeting is held. Cheers! Marilyn [Brown] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Carter Subject: RE: [AML] Story vs words Date: 31 Oct 2003 14:26:50 -0900 >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Original Message From "Susan Malmrose" = , that's tricky stuff. > >I haven't read it, but I've heard Stephen King wrote a book about=3D > bookwriting. Anyone >read it? Any good? It's called _On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft_. I thought everyone in the whole world had read it. I used it in a sophormore writing class I'm teaching right now, and so far it's the book my class has enjoyed the most (despite having the inestimable= privlege of reading The Things They Carried and The Hours). The book offers= all kinds of ways to talk about writing with budding writers. It's also a= gas to read. Probably my favorite Stephen King work. One of the things I like best about it is that you get to see a warm, human= side to King. Even if his voice might be a flattering representation of King= in real life, it was a pleasure to read. Another interesting thing is to see= how some of King's books are metaphors for his particular writing process -= _Misery_ being the most interesting example. Stephen Carter Fairbanks, Alaska -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Carter Subject: RE: [AML] another book query Date: 31 Oct 2003 14:40:19 -0900 >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Original Message From "Elizabeth Petty Bentley"= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >One of my favorite translations is The Five Books of Moses (The Schocken >Bible, Volume 1) by Everett Fox. It can make even Leviticus sing And may I recommend _The Poet's Bible_ by David Rosenberg (who did the translations in _The Book of J_ with Harold Bloom). It's really a fantastic poetic read. His main purpose with the book was to regain the passion and currency of the Bible's poetry. So you'll find things= like car radios and highways in Isaiah and nuclear bomb references in Job. I= can't recommend this book highly enough. Makes me with there were more= poetry in the Book of Mormon. Stephen Carter Fairbanks, Alaska -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Quinn Warnick" Subject: [AML] New Edition of the BoM (Was: "another book query") Date: 31 Oct 2003 16:33:04 -0700 Richard Johnson wrote: | My son, Ryan (a former member of the list who got into management and | doesn't - he says- have time to read his work Email , let alone the | list) who is a Librarian at Washington State University told me that, | last month, his library received a really beautiful new version of the | Book of Mormon, published by the University of Illinois. It was, he | says, edited from a nineteenth century edition and given a really nice | treatment by the publisher. I found this book on the site for the U of Illinois Press. Here's the link: http://www.press.uillinois.edu/s03/hardy.html It does indeed look like it's been nicely done. Thanks for the tip,= Richard. Now I have another book to put on my Christmas wishlist. I don't remember any discussion on the list about this new edition, either. Has anyone out there read and/or seen this? Is it as nice as the website makes it sound? -Quinn Warnick -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard Johnson" Subject: RE: [AML] List Archive Date: 31 Oct 2003 18:44:50 -0500 Well, I don't have all of it but I have a lot of it. It was fun, when Ed Snow's book was published, to read through the book and read through the posts and compare them. (some he edited a lot, but a lot of it was just as it was on the list.) Richard B. Johnson, Husband, Father, Grandfather, Actor, Director, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool. I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important- and most valuable. Http://www.PuppenRich.com I sure wish there was a way to make the archive include the first five years of AML-List. We had some great conversations. Not only that, there was a period when we had AML-Mag up and running as a full-fledged online magazine, with one or two columists running columns every weekday. We'd coordinate our topics, and when it went well, two or three of the columns would each spawn a related thread, and those would twine around each other and finally braid and merge toward Friday. It was just plain artful and taught me a lot about what you could achieve with an online publiation. I'd love to see an archive of columns we sponsored also. At least two went on to be published books, but I thought the others were excellent too. Ben Parkinson ben@parkinsonfamily.org Former AML-List Moderator Speaking for myself, and I hope others on the list! -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] L'Engle YA fiction Date: 01 Nov 2003 01:19:02 -0700 Rose Green said, of L'Engle "Aside from her YA science fiction, I particularly enjoyed her autobiography of her marriage (Two-Part Invention). Not YA, but a very good book on the family life of two artists." I too have loved L'Engle's CROSSWICKS JOURNALS, especially books One and Two, A CIRCLE OF QUIET and THE SUMMER OF THE GREAT-GRANDMOTHER. TWO-PART INVENTION is the fifth book in that series. Talk about being allowed into a person's soul. L'Engle is generous and honest. She had many things to say that enlightened me. For instance: "When we are SELF-conscious, we cannot be wholly aware; we must throw ourselves out first. This throwing ourselves away is the act of creativity. So, when we wholly concentrate, like child in play, or an artist at work, then we share in the act of creating. We not only escape time, we also escape our self-conscious self." I think of that each time I write and re-read my words and find myself wondering what so-and-so would think, or if it's worthy of publication. "The Greeks had a word for ultimate self-consciousness," L'Engle goes on, "hubris: pride: pride in the sense of putting oneself in the center of the universe..." Then she analyzes her response to sharing her thoughts: "I was timid about putting forth most of these thoughts, but this kind of timidity is itself a form of pride. The moment that humility becomes self-conscious, it becomes hubris. One cannot be humble and aware of oneself at the same time. Therefore, the act of creating--painting a picture, singing a song, writing a story--is a humble act? This thought was new to me. Humility is throwing oneself away in complete concentration on something or someone else." (A CIRCLE OF QUIET, pg. 11) That's when a story really works for me--when there is no authorial intrusion, no sense of being led to someone's morale agenda, just a world opening where I experience someone else's life. I've never gotten that sense reading anything by Richard Paul Evans. His SELF is all over every page. His desire to be liked, to be noticed for his cleverness or tenderness or whatever. On the other hand, I get lost in every Louise Plummer book I've read, and they could be classified as simple plots or stories, written to a YA audience. A world opened for me in HOLES by Louis Sachar. In FALLING TOWARD HEAVEN by John Bennion. In THE SECRET LIFE OF BEES by Sue Monk Kidd, HERESIES OF NATURE by Margaret Young, BREAKING CLEAN by Judy Blunt, A DANCE FOR THREE by Louis Plummer, DARK ANGEL by Robert Kirby, ...I could go on. (Are you thinking "you've gone on too much already?) Then there were some books that tried to open worlds, who partially succeeded, but whose clever author, whose author with a mission, was too sensed: MORMONVILLE by Jeff Call, The JOSHUA books by Joseph Girzone, any of the LEFT BEHIND books by Tim LaHayne and Jerry Jenkins, LE DIVORCE by Diane Johnson...THE WORK AND THE GLORY series (blah, blah, blah she keeps going on...). These titles (and I'll be you could add others) had self-conscious authors standing behind them inserting themselves and weakening the story. (I purposely scanned my shelves looking for a mix of Mormon and non-Mormon writers. People are self-conscious on both sides of that fence.) How does one learn to be humble enough to let go of self? It's a true act of faith in the face of something very scary--exposing your imagination, your thoughts, (your SELF? Yikes am I getting metaphysical here?) to be judged by others. I wouldn't make a very good critic, I'm afraid. I have too much respect for those that even try putting a story on paper. I can close a book and say "well that didn't do it for me", but it's hard for me to tell the world that this book is worth reading and that one isn't. I fall too much on the authorial side of the author/critic divide. Yet, then I read opinions here on the list that we'll never produce great writers in our LDS culture until we produce a body of critical examinations and great critics to whom we learn to listen. I feel like an innocent, a babe, among minds that can deconstruct, analyze, hypothesize. Oops, but now that's me being self-conscious and worrying about what people will think of what I have to say. So just say it and write. Let go. Or go to bed. At 1:00 in the morning one tends to ramble. And I just came to check my email to see what time the conference start in the morning... Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mary Aagard Subject: Re: [AML] The envious critic Date: 01 Nov 2003 04:08:53 -0800 (PST) Annette Lyon wrote: I just reread Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, and this thread keeps reminding me about the concept of Quality in that book. *Zen* insists that Quality is exists outside of opinion, and that we all can recognize= it. But then why do we all disagree so much about it? I have found many of the posts defending Rowling interesting, but I can't agree. I may be way off base, but I don't think she wrote book five as deliberately and carefully as her others. This list is the only place I= have heard anyone say they thought the last book was as good as the rest--and like almost everyone on the planet, I know lots of Harry Potter fans (and= am one myself). The consensus among those I've talked to is that Rowling doesn't have to be as careful crafting her work anymore; she'll sell millions of copies no matter what and we who already love her stories, her world, and her characters, will forgive any sloppiness and read it anyway (my criticisms of the book won't prevent me from preordering the next two= in the series. I love Harry Potter). That it's still a good book, but it= wasn't GREAT. I know I presonally felt let down by it; book five simply didn't= live up to the others. Mary says: Another source/review of Order of the Phoenix that claims it is better than= the others, etc. (So it's not just this list...) = http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2003/06/23/harry_potter/index.html I'm not a fan of the reviewer (Laura Miller) but her review of the book= supports the "better than the last ones" claim. Mary Aagard -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sam Brown Subject: [AML] story and passion Date: 01 Nov 2003 10:48:26 -0500 Hello, I appreciated Margaret's thoughtful response. I agree with what I think is her main point that false ardor regarding something we simply aren't interested in is not constructive. I'm not saying that we should pillory things we have no interest in. That's why I don't post on Potter. I just don't care. I've glanced at the books but never found them particularly compelling; I've found the films vaguely entertaining and have no specific concerns or reservations. I would never buy them or see them again, but I have nothing against them. So, aside from being envious of someone selling tens of millions of books, I have no passion about Rowling's oeuvre. So I don't talk about it. The same goes for the musician that Margaret's husband loves. Unless my neighbors at the concert were indulging in some cannabis, I doubt I would be much stimulated by the concert. There's another side to this, though. There are a couple of advantages to speaking passionately about even something you don't know well. First, it gives you a chance to feel and express yourself. Most agree that responses to art are individual and often express as much or more about the critic as about the art. But that's okay. We should know how to express ourselves; we learn about ourselves as we get serious about something, even (perhaps especially) art. I agree there's a downside to this, a misuse of art to stratify social classes (Juliet Schor writes poignantly about studies that show that the best way to guess a person's income is to browse their music collection and conversely that an easy way to predict a person's artistic tastes is to know their actual or anticipated income/social class), but I believe that even in htis case part of learning about social classes is getting passionate about the variations in art. Second, it's good to feel about topics. Diatribes against a work of art can activate others to discuss them with equal passion and can lead to illumination, the moment of conversion, the exposure to a true partisan. I read in the Atlantic Monthly a few months ago a recommendation to change agnosticism to "apatheism," a movement that just doesn't care what your religious beliefs are, and it's that kind of smugly indifferent irrelevance that I'm responding to. Of course, we always have to maintain the axiom that people are not to be demeaned, derided, or distrusted as a function of their taste in art. It's tempting (for me) to look down my urbane nose at people who read romance novels, Mormon or otherwise, and in my weaker moments I have been known to do so. It's not something to be proud of, though even aggressively negative literary criticism of the works of art themselves I believe--if I cared about the topic, which I have to admit I don't--would be okay. And I believe (hypocritically at times) that we ought not to stratify our communities as a function of our tastes, whether high-, mid-, or low(en)brow (pardon the beer pun; I couldn't resist). -- Yours, Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital sam@vecna.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sam Brown Subject: [AML] forsberg book Date: 02 Nov 2003 22:21:02 -0500 Hello, Equal Rites: The Book of Mormon, Masonry, Gender, and American Culture Authors: Clyde R. Forsberg Jr columbia press, 2003 anybody read this? is it worth buying? -- Yours, Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital sam@vecna.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sam Brown Subject: [AML] Carnage (Review) Date: 01 Nov 2003 11:15:04 -0500 Carnages (2002) Director/Writer: Delphine Gleize Unrated (would be "R" is US) From the buzz it appears that this is a debut for Gleize, who has done= simply a fantastic job. I give about a movie per year (max) an A, and this one= garners an A- in my book, probably the best I've seen all year. The basic= story-line is that a bull is slaughtered after an eventful encounter with a toreador in= Spain, and portions of his body are distributed across Europe. We come to= know the people through the "carnage" of the bull. His eyes are sent to a= neurotic veterinarian in France whose wife is pregnant with quintuplets (she has been= taking infertility therapy without telling him). The femur is sent to a huge dog, "Fred," the reason that Winnie, an epileptic, starry-eyed French= girl believes that the world is filled with animals larger than humans, via an= out- of-work Italian actress who is finding herself in nude regression bathing therapy at the local pool. (This is some of the most refreshing, merrily= non- erotic nudity I've seen since _Room with a View_. This is where the film= would garner an "R" rating unless the male pudenda qualify for an NC-17; I would= take my daughter once she was 15 or so). The horns are stolen by one of the most= endearing babushki with a lazy eye (paralleling the blind eye of the bull),= who gives them to her son, a reclusive aspiring taxidermist who is splaying the= innards (incorrectly) of their five Guinea pigs. The movie is filled with death and scars, and it does it in a way that is ultimately affirming. There is clear celebration of the cycles of life and= a sense of prying into our scars (there are several shots of bandaids), as our= scars sometimes pry into us (as in the actress who is afraid to remove the= mole that invades her chest "halfway between my nipples," just as her mother's= mole does). In this sense, there seems to be play with the themes of Hawthorne's= "Birthmark". It is also filled with love and kindness, particularly the relationship between the babushka and her taxidermist son, the accidental romance of the actress and the ersatz figure skater, and the tragic relationship of Winnie's schoolteacher with her own troubled mother. There= is a sense here (tying it to AML) that the complex net (like the tapestry of= the Fates) of relationships and coincidences is a postmodern reflection of the presence of God, a contemporary expression of the security that the Hebrews= felt in knowing that history was higher and more complex than any of them= could fathom and that there was a pattern in it. I have to say that of the frenetic comedies that explore life in a somewhat= existential way, this is by far the most compelling and pleasant I've seen in recent memory (better, even, than _Igby Goes Down_). My wife and I loved the film and felt refreshed by it. I wish I had written it. We had= to see it at the arthouse cinema, so I suspect it will need to be viewed on DVD (if the web is right, it's only showing in San Francisco and Boston). Happy viewing. sam -- Yours, Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital sam@vecna.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sam Brown Subject: [AML] Thomas MCCARTHY "The Station Agent" (Review) Date: 01 Nov 2003 11:06:01 -0500 The Station Agent Thomas McCarthy 2003 http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0340377/ This brilliant Indie won several prizes at Sundance and is now showing in arthouse cinemas around the country. It's a spirited meditation on loneliness, belonging, and friendship, that revolves around the accidental exile of Fin (played with luminous understatement by Peter Dinklage) to a train depot in white trash New Jersey ("Newfoundland") where he meets/is befriend by a) a tranquilizer-addicted woman whose son died in a playground accident, b) a good-hearted Latino from Manhatten named Joe, c) a pregnant librarian who is just legal and fighting with the redneck rube who impregnated her, and d) a chubby elementary school girl who plays house in an abandoned train. They are brought together in some sense by Fin's trials as a dwarf (he is a handsome thirty-something who stands just under four-and-a-half feet tall), but by much more than that. A theme throughout the film is the pursuit of trains, a topic that the director toys with before giving himself into it. I'm not interested in plot spoilers, but I will say that trains are a vibrant, interactive background on which the story takes place. I particularly appreciated the study of how friendships evolve with deviants. How long can a new friend wait to learn about a scar, a missing limb, a physical disability, socially deviant behavior? Joe is almost Christ-like in his lack of concern for Fin's dwarfism, a fact that the director plays with and highlights in two drawn-out= conversations of near misapprehension. Late in the film, though, even loving Joe has to notice that fact when he wonders whether Fin has lost his virginity, and if so, was it to a woman with dwarfism. We feel, with Fin, the betrayal of the unconditional affection of their friendship and recognize our shared culpability in focusing on his dwarfism ourselves. In a metafictive pang, I realize as I write this that I was so impressed with Dinklage's acting that I want to see him in other films, but I don't know how he would be incorporated without the film being about his dwarfism. A wonderful film that I would recommend to anyone college-age and above. I think (but can't remember) that there may be some language that would seem vulgar on Temple Square. There are no special effects or gore, and though there are intimate moments, there is no sex. I'd give it an A-. -- Yours, Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital sam@vecna.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eugene Woodbury" Subject: Re: [AML] Story vs words Date: 01 Nov 2003 09:20:11 -0700 > I haven't read it, but I've heard Stephen King wrote a book about writing. On Writing by Stephen King Highly recommended. The first half of the book is a memoir, "How I grew up to become a writer." The second half could be called, "What being a best-selling author has taught Stephen King about writing." It's less technically prescriptive than many "how to" writing books, but every bit of advice he dispenses carries the weight of there being a lot of money where the mouth is. I consider it a must-read for anybody serious about writing at any level. Stick it on the shelf next to your Strunk & White. While I'm at it, I'll plug another one of my favorite "how to" writing books, The 38 Most Common Fiction Writing Mistakes (And How to Avoid Them), by Jack M. Bickham. Like On Writing, it has the added advantage of brevity, the point being, I think, that one should spend less time reading books about writing and more time writing. Eugene Woodbury -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eugene Woodbury" Subject: Re: [AML] Stylistic choices Date: 01 Nov 2003 10:14:33 -0700 Clark Goble [On the other hand I loved Tom Swift books as a kid . . . . ] I couldn't agree more. There are books that I absolutely loved growing up that I now can't get through a dozen pages without groaning. But that does not diminish the wonderful, transfixing, transforming effect those books had on me. This is best captured in the excerpt below where Sullivan notes, "Keats's magic casements are often tawdry, fairground things." It's like going back to the school playground of your youth. There's always something . . . missing. Part of growing up is recognizing that the things we love are not perfect. True, some adults then spend the rest of their lives focusing only on the faults. But if we don't recognize the faults, we can't improve on them. Nostalgia about the past (even the immediate past) should not blind us to the essential human conviction that we can always do better. The lesson, then, is not, as Francis Fukuyama might put it, that children's lit has somehow arrived at the "end of history," from whence there can be no more progression. Rather, as Philip Pullman observed, that "We need stories so much that we're even willing to read bad books to get them, if the good books won't supply them." In other words, better to write the good books, with the good stories, in the first place. And as Sullivan points out, J.K. Rowling IS better, more compelling, than many popular children's authors fifty, or a hundred years ago. K.A. Applegate is certainly better than The Hardy Boys. Lemony Snicket stands in a category all of his own. Part of hoping the upward trend continues is not settling when settling isn't called for. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/01/1059480540717.html Harry Potter and the ardour of the critiques by Jane Sullivan I was utterly enthralled by Blyton's Adventure series of books, in which four children and a parrot called Kiki . . . braved all sorts of dangers, from crooks to natural disasters. . . . They were no doubt badly written, they were full of outdated assumptions about what girls and boys do . . . and the most interesting character was the parrot. The Harry Potter books, by comparison, are brilliant literature. Byatt makes a distinction between "real magic" (the numinous, found in children's books that are also great literature) and "ersatz magic" (found in Rowling's work, television cartoons and soapies, and so on). But what Enid Blyton did for me is precisely what Byatt claims that badly written popular books can never do: they gave me the shiver of awe we feel looking through Keats's "magic casements, opening on the foam/Of perilous seas, in faery lands forlorn." Time enough to discover real magic in literature when readers are older. But perhaps with all her adult learning and experience, Byatt has forgotten that for children in particular, Keats's magic casements are often tawdry, fairground things: it's where you get to beyond and what you take with you that counts, and that experience is entirely in the mind of the young reader. To provide the context, here's the Byatt review: http://www.iht.com/articles/101985.html Magic for a generation that hasn't known mystery by A.S. Byatt If we regress, we regress to a lost sense of significance we mourn for. Ursula K. Le Guin's wizards inhabit an anthropologically coherent world where magic really does act as a force. Rowling's magic wood has nothing in common with these lost worlds. It is small, and on the school grounds, and dangerous only because she says it is. In this regard, it is magic for our time. Rowling speaks to an adult generation that hasn't known, and doesn't care about, mystery. They are inhabitants of urban jungles, not of the real wild. They don't have the skills to tell ersatz magic from the real thing, for as children they daily invested the ersatz with what imagination they had. [Eugene Woodbury] -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Story vs words Date: 01 Nov 2003 16:32:45 -0500 --- Original Message --- >I haven't read it, but I've heard Stephen King wrote a book about=3D > bookwriting. Anyone >read it? Any good? It's called On Writing. It's great. He talks a lot about not using adverbs. Amazon.com has it. You can search now on Amazon so you can see what it contains. -- Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: [AML] The King (was: Stylistic choices) Date: 01 Nov 2003 17:06:10 -0500 In my opinion, the only book of King's that justified the length was The Stand. His other longer works smell of the occasional plot thickener for its own sake. I never felt as though I'd fallen out of the Stand's universe, wondering, "Why did he do that." _Insomnia_ is an example of a King book where practically a third of its length could have been shortened because it kept going on and on and on before it finally got back to the main point. -- Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] Michael McLean profile (DN) Date: 02 Nov 2003 13:18:00 +0000 Sunday, November 2, 2003 Deseret Morning News Michael McLean: Dreaming big Like a Don Quixote, he strives to uplift By Doug Robinson HEBER CITY - A large wooden statue of Don Quixote stares down at visitors from its perch on a ledge high above the family room in Michael McLean's spacious log house. As with everything else in McLean's world, there is a story behind it. Newcomers quickly learn that McLean --= storyteller, songwriter, pianist, author, moviemaker, singer, producer -- finds meaning= and epiphany everywhere. The story goes that at the age of 15 he saw a performance of "Man of La Mancha" in Chicago. When the show was finished and the audience was filing out of the theater, McLean remained seated, moved to tears but too stunned to move. "I was transformed," he recalls, eyes tearing up again at the= recollection. "I identified with Don Quixote. He saw the greatness in people. Dulcinea= says to him, 'Why don't you see me for who I am?' And he says, 'I do.' "I decided I wanted to be like Don Quixote, and I wanted to be like= those guys who told the story about him. I thought if I could uplift somebody= else the way this uplifted me, I will have used up my space here meaningfully." Now 51, McLean has made a career of trying to do just that. He has written lyrics and music for an exhausting 25 albums. He has written books (with accompanying music CDs), theatrical productions, oratorios, music videos, films for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, radio= and TV commercials, jingles and TV movies. Among his most famous creations are "Mr. Krueger's Christmas" (starring Jimmy Stewart) and "Nora's= Christmas Gift" (starring Celeste Holm), both TV films, and "The Forgotten Carols." McLean also does live shows, which consist of him telling stories and then singing songs he has written that fit the story or idea, accompanying himself on piano. "Garrison Keillor meets Billy Joel" is how he describes himself. He has played everywhere from cruise ships to Mormon firesides to Disneyland to a dental conference at Abravanel Hall to dozens of other largely LDS audiences around the country. Not bad for a guy who says he can't sing or act and isn't "good= looking like Kurt Bestor." (What would Don Quixote think?) The irony is that for many years McLean couldn't see his own worth until he discovered therapy and medicine, but more on that later. "Michael is one of a kind, truly," says Sheri Dew, CEO of Deseret= Book, which distributes much of McLean's work. "There has been no one else in the LDS culture who has been as prolific and as diversified in his talents.= . . . It would simply be impossible to measure or quantify the good this man has done." McLean believes his mission in life is to move people the way he was moved in that Chicago theater, and he lives for such moments as this: Once a young girl called him and explained that she was pregnant and unmarried and planned to put her baby up for adoption. She asked McLean if he would write a song that would help her baby understand someday that she was given away for the right reasons. When McLean finished writing "From God's Arms to My Arms to Yours," he played it for the girl over the phone. The girl cried and asked, "How did you know? That's exactly what I am feeling." McLean says he still gets 20 requests a month from people who want permission to use the song. Marie Osmond read the song's lyrics on "Larry King Live" and shared it on TV with Rosie O'Donnell. Afterward, adoption agencies around the country called to gain access to it, and Dave Thomas, the late Wendy's restaurant founder, used the song as part of a campaign to encourage adoption. "He has his finger on the pulse of how men and women really feel-- which is why so many of his songs connect with so many people," says Dew. Once a young woman approached him after one of his "Forgotten Carols" concerts in Texas during the Christmas season. Looking at her feet, she mumbled, "I think I can like Christmas now," and then turned and walked away. Moments later, another woman approached him and explained, "That was my best friend. She was raped on Christmas Eve and has refused to participate in Christmas. I begged her to come tonight because I saw it= last year. How can I thank the man who gave my best friend Christmas back again?" Well, if McLean's life sounds like a Hallmark commercial or a= Christmas special, so be it. McLean is unapologetically sentimental. "I think I was sent here to help," he says. "It's something in the= way I'm wired. I'm painfully sensitive to what other people are going through.= I know it sounds pretentious. But there's this sense of wearing out my life doing something for someone else." Not that McLean hasn't helped himself. He quit his day job with Bonneville Productions a dozen years ago after writing "The Forgotten= Carols," which began as a book/CD combination and morphed into a one-man live show and then into a full-blown two-hour theatrical production that makes a= 16-city tour each Christmas. That has afforded him independence and a 20-acre estate near Heber, surrounded by alfalfa fields and mountain vistas, not= far from trout streams in which to indulge his fly fishing passion. "My life is so cool because I don't have to put in my 40 hours and= then figure out how I'm going to write and do these other things," says McLean. Passionate, animated and driven, McLean burns as many calories by= talking as most people do jogging. He seems to have a dozen projects going at once, and twice that many ideas. That keeps him on the road. There is an upcoming trip to Italy to seek funding for a movie project. There is his annual= nationwide tour during the Christmas season. There is a gig at Disneyland. There is a= trip to L.A. to promote his new book. He has never lacked ambition or determination. After all, we're= talking about a man who began making a list of goals when he was 8 years old. He wrote his first song at 11 -- about the mashed potatoes and gravy on his Sunday dinner plate, which he still plays for laughs at his concerts. As a= teen, he made a list of things he needed to improve about himself. When he was finished it was six pages long. As a high school student in the Chicago area, he was student body president, the lead role in the "Music Man," an Eagle Scout, an A student (second in his graduating class), state qualifier for the varsity tennis= team and runner-up in the state speech contest for original monologue -- and that= was just his junior year. Even then, he was sensitive enough for others' needs that he arranged for football players and "cool" kids in the school to devote the first hour= of school dances to making sure every girl was danced with before they could dance with their dates. As the lone Mormon in his school, he made a conscious effort to build goodwill for his church and win a few converts, handing out copies of the Book of Mormon and holding monthly firesides at his house. McLean's father, Hugh, was a business consultant whose job required frequent moves. His mother, Marty, was a homemaker who probably contributed to her son's penchant for telling stories. After watching= movies at the local theater, she would act out the entire show the next morning for her two children, performing all the parts and even singing the songs= if there were any. "When I saw the movie itself, I'd think, 'Gee, it was better when Mom did it,' " recalls McLean. McLean began studying classical piano when he was 10. His role model became his piano instructor, a strong, masculine paratrooper with the= National Guard who played piano like a master, at least in the boy's eyes. "He wasn't= a wimp in the rest of his life," recalls McLean. At their first lesson, he= made his mark on McLean with a series of rhetorical questions. "Do you know what= it's like to feel really mad? Really happy? Sad?" he would ask him, and after each question he would play a song that matched the emotion. "He was like Yoda," says McLean. "He looked at me and said, 'Michael, you've got all that stuff in you, but you can't get it out of your fingers.= It's stuck in your heart and brain. You've got the music in you the same as I= do. The reason we practice is so we can let it out.' " They started with Rachmaninoff. They spent six weeks just working on the left hand of the first page, then six more weeks on the right hand, and then three more weeks putting them together. It was eight months before he could play the entire three-minute piece from memory. The next song took almost a year. By the end of his second year of lessons, he had learned a grand total of three songs. His teacher created another significant moment for McLean when he= took him to a classical piano concert. McLean was moved by the performance, but then his 11-year-old mind was struck with a thought on the drive home: The memory of the musician's performance would fade over the years, but the song itself would go on and affect people forever. If he wanted to have a lasting impact, he would have to write songs. He wrote songs for his Boy Scout troop. He wrote them for trick-or- treating. ("It increased my candy take 400 percent.") He wrote songs for school assemblies and church skits and for girls. He wrote about= loneliness, anger, unrequited teen crushes. He liked to lock the downstairs bathroom and sing his songs in front of the mirror. "It was the way I coped with life," he recalls. "It expressed what I= was feeling. What my teacher had said was true. I could get these emotions out now." The real trick, he discovered, was earning a living with it. He served= an LDS Church mission in South Africa, where, as part of his missionary work, McLean and his companions formed a musical group as a way to reach people and promote families. After their missions were completed, the band regrouped and began playing the Utah music scene, which was mostly bars, clubs and dances. Their biggest payday came when they wrote the score for the movie "The Life and Times of Grizzly Adams," which netted them $1,000 to be divided among six band members for six days of work, no royalties. McLean dropped out of school to pursue his music, but the band= couldn't get a record deal, and the clubs they played frequently stiffed them for= their fee. Eventually the band disbanded. McLean's music ambitions were getting little encouragement. He had taken a music theory class at BYU "to see if= my passion for music might be worth pursuing professionally." The professor= gave him a C and told him to enjoy music as a hobby and keep his day job. He took the advice and transferred to the University of Utah to study business with plans to work with his father. In a last-ditch attempt to see= if he had what it took, he drove to BYU weekly to take a music composition class from the highly respected Merrill Bradshaw. The other students were producing symphonies; McLean was writing pop songs about the death of a friend's baby and a humor piece about applause. Bradshaw gave him little feedback, and at the end of the term McLean asked him if he should continue his musical pursuits. After a long pause, Bradshaw said he didn't know what to make of his talents, "but if you quit I would consider it a personal loss. Whatever it= is that you do affects me." By now, McLean was married and had a daughter. His wife Lynne worked as a nurse, and McLean sold shoes at ZCMI and continued to do free-lance music work. Noting their empty bank account, Lynne suggested that he try writing commercial jingles. McLean became a one-man ad agency, writing countless jingles, some of which won Clio Awards. (Years later he was watching the news, surfing the three local TV news programs, when he realized he had written every local commercial on the air that night.) Many of the commercials still get played. His work includes: Deseret Book ("When you open a book from Deseret Book, you open a wonderful door"); Zions Bank ("People really do mean everything at Zions"); milk ("Cola darkness covered me til the Refresher set me free"); Motorsportsland ("Let Motorsportsland help you get away"); Gibsons= ("Gibsons gives you more, because we are a very extraordinary discount store"); R.C. Willey ("There's a house of things for your home"); and Major League= Baseball ("Who will be the real hero?"). When Lynne got in a bad automobile accident, McLean dropped out of school to take care of her and their daughter and never went back to finish his degree. "I wonder now why my father let me marry him," says Lynne. "He had no education and no prospects. He was a rock and roll singer. But I= believed he could do it. It didn't dawn on me that he wouldn't be successful. He= always found a way to support us. After we had Meagan, I told him we needed to talk about our budget. He was very uncomfortable. He didn't want to talk about it. Finally, he said, 'How much more do we need?' I told him $100= more a month. He said, 'I'll get it.' So he wrote another jingle. He was a good provider." After seeing LDS Church commercials that encouraged parents to love and understand their children, Lynne told her husband he should write= similar commercials for rock stations that encouraged kids to love and listen to= their parents. Bonneville Productions liked the idea, and McLean created a number of ads for the LDS Church's Homefront campaign. They offered him a job as producer of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. He was 24. He worked there for the next 17 years. McLean's job was to produce the choir's radio and TV show and also expand its audience. And so he wrote "Mr. Krueger's Christmas" -- the story= of a lonely old man who daydreams about conducting the Mormon Tabernacle Choir and being present at the birth of the Christ child. McLean spent the next four years trying to convince the church to= make it into a TV special. Just as his mother did years before, he stood in front= of various LDS leaders, including the First Presidency, and acted out each= part for 35 minutes, running back and forth between the piano and his floor act. After killing the project several times, the church finally gave it its= blessing and then asked him who would produce the movie. "Me," he said. He had to do some fast talking. He had no experience making movies -- all he had done was commercials and how would he sign a star for the show? After pretending to be a deliveryman to deliver the contract to Jimmy Stewart's agent, he signed the legendary movie star for a fraction of his normal fee. The film has reportedly been seen by more than 300 million people and has become a TV Christmas tradition. In the years since then, McLean has been nothing if not prolific.= Besides "Mr. Krueger's Christmas" and "Nora's Christmas Gift" (which was inspired= by his grandmother), plus his 25 albums, he has: =95 Produced theatrical presentations; =95 Written "The Forgotten Carols" and "Celebrating the Light" (which= made a five-year run at Promised Valley Playhouse); =95 Co-written "The Ark"; =95 Written three books, "The Forgotten Carols," "Distant Serenade"= (one of McLean's personal favorites) and the autobiographical "Hold On (The= Light Will Come)," which evolved into a theatrical production; =95 Co-written a 75-minute oratorio about the Garden of Gethsemane,= which premiered in Israel and employs a 200-voice choir, a 60-piece orchestra and seven soloists; =95 And co-written and produced several films that have become staples= for the LDS Church, including "Prodigal Son," "Together Forever," "What Is= Real?" and "Our Heavenly Father's Plan." "He is as purely creative as anyone I have ever met," says Dew. "There= is no end -- at least none that I have seen =97 to the new ideas he can= generate. He's a big thinker. He's a dreamer. He's visionary." Kurt Dahl, the creative director of Bonneville Communications who= worked with McLean for 12 years, tells this story about a commercial he wrote= called "The Waterfight," which went on to win a medal at the Cannes Film Festival= and was included on a list of the top 100 TV commercials of all time: "We were in the scripting stage, and I had a tagline for the= commercial: 'It's often life's small moments that bring the great memories; don't let= the magic pass you by.' I took it to Mike and I told him about this line and= this spot. I said it needed a song to go with it that would make it enjoyable and fun, something to set the tone. Twenty minutes later he comes back and says,= 'I've got it. Come listen.' I thought, are you kidding? He played it on the piano= for me and it was perfect. "He always has ideas. Where his strength lies is that he can distill= an array of emotions into one small lyric. . . . Whenever we wanted music and lyrics, he= was the first guy we called. He is brilliant." None of this is by accident. McLean has worked hard at his craft.= Early in his career, he decided that if he was going to make a career of songwriting,= then he had better discipline himself to write them whether the inspiration was= there or not. So he wrote a song every day for one year. "I wrote a lot of really bad songs, trust me," he says. "But I learned= how to get to the core, and how to find a good hook. It really paid off. I wanted= to discipline myself so that if someone said, 'Mike, I need a song,' I could do= it without waiting for a time when I was feeling great inspiration." Once an idea strikes, he works and reworks it, sometimes sitting at= the piano at home in the middle of the night, playing it over and over again. Then he= looks for an audience, and anyone in the house is fair game. Lacking that, he has= even been known to sing his latest creation over the phone to get a critique. "What he does best is tell stories that reach the heart and connect= with people," says Lynne. "It helps them find hope in their own lives." "I love what I do," says McLean. "If I could have chosen what I would= do, it would be what I'm doing." There have been hard times, though. He battled depression for years, suffering a handful of collapses. He finally sought therapy and two years= ago he began taking medication -- "magic pills," he calls them, which he considers= a new lease on life. And there have been battles with his own insecurities --= namely his voice, which is adequate but not strong, and his stage presence -- all= of which were no doubt were at least partially abetted by his depression. For years he wrote songs for other people to sing. When he began performing live, fans would say they wanted to hear the same on his albums= that they heard at his concert. Lynne finally convinced him to make an album on which he sings his own songs, "Michael Sings McLean." "I talked him into it," says Lynne. "I said I need something for my grandchildren." His insecurities and depression notwithstanding, McLean would= certainly seem to be a man who has fashioned a good life. He lives in the countryside near Heber, with a view that could be straight out of the Swiss Alps. And= he speaks passionately about his love for his wife of 29 years. They met on a blind date. "The first time I met him I was thinking, 'Is this guy real?' " says= Lynne. "He was really energetic. He was playing every song he knew and telling= every story and poem he knew. It was hysterical. I found out that's the way he is.= He's a lot of fun." In 1983, during a particularly down period of time in his career,= McLean used to drive to Heber every day for a year just to hang out in the valley. Sensing McLean's melancholy over the phone, a friend named Keith Ross flew out from New York to offer support. They drove to Heber together and wound up standing in the middle of an alfalfa field. Ross called a real estate= agent and wrote a check for the property on the spot. When McLean protested that he couldn't afford it, Ross replied, "This= is where you need to be to do what you need to do. Pay me back when you can." McLean has done almost all of his writing in a home office here. With= success came money, and he and Ross split the property and built two homes here.= They named the place "Scotshaven." Over the years, it has served as home for extended family and friends. "Ross' words came true," says McLean. "Almost everything I've written= has been here." The McLeans have raised their three children at Scotshaven. Meagan,= 28, a law school graduate, is director of a mediation firm in Seattle. Scott, 25,= who graduated from a prestigious acting conservatory in New York, is an actor= and dabbles with songwriting with his father. Jeff, 24, who studied singing in California, teaches voice and is working on a record deal and has= collaborated with his father. This time of year McLean is preparing for the annual "Forgotten= Carols" tour during the Christmas season. There are arrangements to be made and promotions to do and a diet to weather. ("So I can get into my skinny pants.") He will play largely to LDS crowds, which are his niche, although= he hopes to broaden his audience. "I never thought of the stuff as being just for Mormons," he says. "I thought I was writing for everybody. I got labeled as the Mormon= songwriter. I would hate for someone to shut off the power of the songs because they thought it was just for LDS people. I would like to reach everyone." McLean is still dreaming big. Don Quixote would. Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] GUNN, "Smart Single GUys" (DN) Date: 02 Nov 2003 13:22:05 +0000 Sunday, November 2, 2003 2 original works open this week By Ivan M. Lincoln Deseret Morning News "SMART SINGLE GUYS," an original comedy by Tony Gunn, will have its world premiere this week at Brigham Young University. According to director Eric Samuelsen, the play is a "multimedia smorgasbord," interweaving comedy sketches, rap and a couple of songs to relate the story of three male BYU students and their involvement in the complicated world of dating. The playwright and director have worked together before. Last year Gunn directed one of Samuelson's scripts for the Villa Playhouse in Springville. Discounted previews are Wednesday and Thursday, after which it will continue through Nov. 15 on Wednesdays-Saturdays at 7:30 p.m. in the Margetts Theatre. There will also be one matinee, Nov. 15 at 2 p.m. The cast includes Hillary Akin, Hollie Beard, Matthew R. Carlin,= Forrest Foster, Tomm Hiatt, Tim Lewis, Eugene McEntire, Michael Padekin, Shelby Pinney, Renny Richmond, Aaron Watts, Steve Watts and Jed Hirschel Wells. Tickets are $12 for general admission seating and $9 for students or= BYU faculty/staff. For reservations call 801-378-4322. "SAINTS AND STRANGERS," a new musical drama about the Pilgrims' voyage on the Mayflower, is co-produced by the Bountiful Performing Arts Center,= Dale White Productions, the National Mayflower Society and the Bountiful Utah Central Stake of the LDS Church. White, a former Hollywood actor-director- producer and now living in Bountiful, has written and directed the= production, inspired by the book by George F. Willison (published in 1945 by Time-Life Books) and Crispin Gill's "Mayflower Remembered." The cast includes Phill= Wright in the central role of Squanto, a humor loving storyteller who claims to be= "the last Patuxet" and who weaves the production's various elements together. There will be three free performances, at 8 p.m. Thursday-Saturday in= the Bountiful Regional Center, North Salt Lake. Tickets are not required;= patrons are encouraged to arrive early for better seats. Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: katie@aros.net Subject: [AML] AML Writers Conference Date: 02 Nov 2003 08:44:56 -0700 I opted not to go to the AML Writers Conference for a number of family= reasons, but I'm dying to find out what I missed! I'm sure there are lots of other= folks around who weren't able to go, and I imagine that folks who did go would= enjoy discussing the experience, so... what are you waiting for? Pull out your= notes and let us know what you learned! I suppose I should ask more politely. If you can find time in your busy schedules, I and many others would love to discuss the conference with you.= Thank you very much. Have a nice day. --Katie Parker -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: [AML] Retell With Pride Date: 02 Nov 2003 18:12:50 -0700 At 08:09 AM 10/31/03 -0600, you wrote: >Elizabeth Bennet is determined to ignore the frenzied dating scene in >her college town. But when she meets Jack Wickham, a charming womanizer, >and Darcy, a wealthy businessman, her resolve is put to the test. Will >her first impressions cloud her judgment, or will she uncover their true >intentions? Go see this modern retelling of everyone's favorite Jane >Austen novel! Why would anyone want to see a modern retelling? What could be better than the version with Colin Firth in it? What sense would it make in today's world for a family to be ruined by a daughter's promiscuous behavior? Who cares about frenzied college dating? barbara hume the opinionated, who loves the Regency period, and who loves the way men looked in those high-cut coats, elegant waistcoats, skin-tight pantaloons, intricately tied cravats, and highly polished Hessian boots -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Christian Unpublished Novel Contest Date: 02 Nov 2003 18:37:59 -0700 At 01:34 PM 10/29/03 -0700, you wrote: >CWG membership is $149 a year. Too bad about this fee! I'm already paying $75/year for RWA membership, plus several other writers' orgs. Anyone know whether the CWG accepts Mormons as Christians? Some such organizations say we're not. barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Dialogue needs fiction Date: 02 Nov 2003 18:41:57 -0700 I'm interested, but I haven't read an issue of Dialogue in some time. Where= could I pick up some recent issues? Barbara R. Hume Provo, Utah -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] in favor of vitriol Date: 02 Nov 2003 18:51:02 -0700 At 02:58 PM 10/29/03 -0700, you wrote: >I frankly wish I had a stronger sense of Mary. I don't even disbelieve >the visions of Bernadette or the Virgin=3D > of Guadalupe. IMHO, Mary (virgin or not) has not received nearly enough= > attention in our art and literature. I don't disbelieve them, either. God speaks to different peoples in their own idioms, and Mormons are not the only people to experience His miracles.= It's the faith that does it! I loved the portrayal of Mary in Scott Bronson's play STONES. It was quite moving. It showed the human side of her, but also her strength. When Jesus paid tribute to her influence on his life, I went completely through one of= the six packages of Kleenex I took to the performance (knowing what Bronson's work always does to me). barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Retell With Pride Date: 03 Nov 2003 17:38:16 -0800 (PST) --- Barbara Hume wrote: > Why would anyone want to see a modern retelling? > What could be better than > the version with Colin Firth in it? What sense would > it make in today's > world for a family to be ruined by a daughter's > promiscuous behavior? Who > cares about frenzied college dating? > > barbara hume the opinionated, who loves the Regency > period, and who loves > the way men looked in those high-cut coats, elegant > waistcoats, skin-tight > pantaloons, intricately tied cravats, and highly > polished Hessian boots. It's a sort of cultural baptism for the dead. The filmmakers convert Austen's characters into young Mormons, thus reassuring the audience that a cultural icon like Austen would have been a latter-day saint, if only she had had the chance:-) ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S. Bezas" Subject: RE: [AML] GUNN, "Smart Single GUys" (DN) Date: 03 Nov 2003 20:33:28 -0500 I would love to hear a review about "Saints and Strangers" (mentioned below). Cindy C.S. Bezas Board of Editors, Advisory Chair LatterDayAuthors.com http://www.latterdayauthors.com -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Hall Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 8:22 AM Sunday, November 2, 2003 2 original works open this week By Ivan M. Lincoln Deseret Morning News "SAINTS AND STRANGERS," a new musical drama about the Pilgrims' voyage on the Mayflower, is co-produced by the Bountiful Performing Arts Center, Dale White Productions, the National Mayflower Society and the Bountiful Utah Central Stake of the LDS Church. White, a former Hollywood actor-director-producer and now living in Bountiful, has written and directed the production, inspired by the book by George F. Willison (published in 1945 by Time-Life Books) and Crispin Gill's "Mayflower Remembered." The cast includes Phill Wright in the central role of Squanto, a humor loving storyteller who claims to be "the last Patuxet" and who weaves the production's various elements together. There will be three free performances, at 8 p.m. Thursday-Saturday in The Bountiful Regional Center, North Salt Lake. Tickets are not required; Patrons are encouraged to arrive early for better seats. Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] GUNN, "Smart SIngle Guys" (BYU Newsnet) Date: 04 Nov 2003 02:04:22 +0000 New play laughs at dating in LDS culture By Sunny Layne NewsNet Staff Writer - 3 Nov 2003 BYU students have the opportunity to laugh at the quirks, = disappointments and small successes of Mormon dating life in "Smart Single Guys," = debuting Nov. 5 in the Margetts Theatre. Director Eric Samuelsen promises this play is not a re-hashed version of recent Mormon date movies. "A lot of Mormon art is trying to be satirical, like 'Single's Ward,'" = he=20 said. "But at the end it seems they feel a duty to give some sanctimonious message, some prechifying. But this show has none of that. It's so nice = to work on a piece that stays satirical." "Smart Single Guys" is an original work by directing major Tony Gunn, who also wrote for BYU's recent sitcom, "So Much in Love." Gunn's play was selected from 10 others in his advanced play writing = class to be produced as part of BYU's main season. The plot revolves around three single Mormon guys - all based off of Gunn's high school friends, who actually portray themselves in the play. "It's different for me, working on this play," said photography major = and cast member Jed Wells. "It's a part of me. It's surreal to see it all = come together." The three friends' escapades with romance often end in hilarious = disaster. "Our director is accurate when he said, 'Considering how guys treat = girls, it's a wonder anyone gets married,'" said assistant stage manager Emily Combe. "The ironic thing is, even though this show is based on these three slightly-clueless guys, two of them already got married in real = life." Gunn and his friends have performed comedy skits together since high school. He wanted to keep their original skit feel, so he wrote using a sketch format and added a live band, "Robot Ghost," for fun. "It's fresh," Wells said. "It's a contemporary look at contemporary = themes. It has an edgy 'Seinfeld' plot, or lack of plot." Samuelsen said the play has features that will reach out to all types of people. "It's a really smart, savvy look at our peculiar subculture," = he said. "A lot of students think of theater as stuffy. I have nothing = against classical theater, but once in a while it's nice to show students, as = part=20 of a college education, that theater can be a whole heck of a lot of = fun." Gunn said the bulk of "Smart Single Guys" has been tested for its funniness, and he feels confident of its comic value. "It's really = fun," he said. "It's a good time. A lot of jokes and situations were performed before audiences in the past who have liked them. So, in a sense, the material has been proven. And, hey, you get a play and a band all in one ticket - it's a fun night out." Samuelsen encouraged the audience to arrive one half hour early to hear the band play. Theatergoers can purchase tickets at the Harris Fine Arts Center Box = Office or by calling 378-4322. Regular seats are $12 and students with ID's are = $9. Preview seats for Nov. 5 and 6 are $5. Copyright, BYU Newsnet -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: daryoung@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] AML Writers Conference Date: 03 Nov 2003 23:22:14 GMT I loved the writer's conference, as always. I love it for the social interaction as much as anything! Some of us had a great dinner together afterwards--next time you should all come. Scott B. would treat us all, = I'm sure. Anyway, my favorite presentation was Tessa Mayer Santiago's. I beg you, = D. Michael, to bring her back next time. I would have liked to hear from = her for another hour. All of the presentations were thought-provoking, but not all were = equally valuable to me. I would have liked the key-note presentations to not be solely focused on film. I would have liked Kristen Randle to spend more = time on her topic (characterization) specifically and less on writing in = general. Some of the things Jong-do-I-really-have-to-type-the-whole-name-out-like-I-do-D.-Michael-ior= gi Enos talked about will show up in a personal essay of mine someday. He compared the process of preparing to write to that of preparing to act. Actors need only three things: sensitivity, speech and relaxation. The great, experienced actors can concentrate solely on relaxation. I saw = how this applies to my singing practice. And giving birth. And life in = general. Now aren't you all on pins and needles to read this essay? If only I had = had more time with Tessa M. Santiago, I may have written this essay already. Anyway, I enjoyed the lunch, too, even though it's always Mexican. (How 'bout Italian next time????) Thanks to D. Michael and the board again. -Darlene Young -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jvkwriter@aol.com Subject: [AML] The AML Conference Date: 03 Nov 2003 20:08:29 EST From katie@aros.net: I opted not to go to the AML Writers Conference for = a number of family reasons, but I'm dying to find out what I missed! I'm = sure there are lots of other folks around who weren't able to go, and I = imagine that folks who did go would enjoy discussing the experience, so... I watched the screening of the movie "The Best Two Years" I was = surprisingly impressed and can't wait for it to come out in February because I know = that my husband will love it. I felt it was very true to the missionary experience, and well filmed. I attended Rick Walton and Julie Olsen's class on Children's Literature. = I=20 learned a lot specifically about the way this market works.=20 Next I attended Tessa M Santiago's class on Personal Essays. This class = was=20 excellent as it clarified some cloudy areas in my mind between personal essay and personal history or story writing. Her examples supported her points excellently. I felt it was very beneficial and interesting. The last class I attended was Jongiori Enos class on Writer's Block. I=20 already agreed with his premise about writer's block but I did not know that's where he was going when the class started. Actually, if I tell = the truth here, I took his class because I wanted to hear him speak after reading so many of his posts. I thought his class was vibrant and energizing which is a feat in = itself,=20 being the last class of the day following a buffet Mexican luncheon that almost required a siesta after the eating experience. He balanced his information in a general or worldly sense with the principles that LDS people are supposedly living. I think many LDS = struggle with incorporating some of their beliefs and still being part of the = world. He spoke frankly to some of these issues. I did not feel his lecture was preachy in any way nor did I think it was at all patronizing. He had several points to make and he made them clearly and concisely, = and=20 with enough generated enthusiasm to excite one to run right home and = write=20 something. I cannot comment on any other classes but what I participated in was = well=20 worth my time, and effort to be there. One final comment. During the = movie and panel discussion I counted the number of women in attendance and = then the number of men in attendance. This is the very first writer's = conference I have ever attended where the number of men equaled the number of = women. I was pleasantly surprised and pointed it out to the people around me. That's all I have say . Janie Van Komen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] GUNN, "Smart Single GUys" (DN) Date: 03 Nov 2003 17:08:19 -0700 This is a very nice preview for a very very fun show. Any of y'all interested in Mormon drama, this is a funny one. Whether it's actually also, you know, good, you will, of course, judge for yourselves. Tony Gunn is a very savvy young writer. Couple things to add: first of all, I did not call the show a 'multi-media smorgasbord,' but now that I see it on the page, I rather wish I had. Second, if you come see it, arrive early. We have a live band, Robot Ghost, who are, in my opinion, terrific. Basically a jazz combo, with some funk and R&B elements. Cast members will also sing with the band from time to time. Eric Samuelsen -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Hall Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:22 AM Sunday, November 2, 2003 2 original works open this week By Ivan M. Lincoln Deseret Morning News "SMART SINGLE GUYS," an original comedy by Tony Gunn, will have its world premiere this week at Brigham Young University. According to director Eric Samuelsen, the play is a "multimedia smorgasbord," interweaving comedy sketches, rap and a couple of songs to relate the story of three male BYU students and their involvement in the complicated world of dating. The playwright and director have worked together before. Last year Gunn directed one of Samuelson's scripts for the Villa Playhouse in Springville. Discounted previews are Wednesday and Thursday, after which it will continue through Nov. 15 on Wednesdays-Saturdays at 7:30 p.m. in the Margetts Theatre. There will also be one matinee, Nov. 15 at 2 p.m. The cast includes Hillary Akin, Hollie Beard, Matthew R. Carlin, Forrest Foster, Tomm Hiatt, Tim Lewis, Eugene McEntire, Michael Padekin, Shelby Pinney, Renny Richmond, Aaron Watts, Steve Watts and Jed Hirschel Wells. Tickets are $12 for general admission seating and $9 for students or BYU faculty/staff. For reservations call 801-378-4322. "SAINTS AND STRANGERS," a new musical drama about the Pilgrims' voyage on the Mayflower, is co-produced by the Bountiful Performing Arts Center, Dale White Productions, the National Mayflower Society and the Bountiful Utah Central Stake of the LDS Church. White, a former Hollywood actor-director-producer and now living in Bountiful, has written and directed the production, inspired by the book by George F. Willison (published in 1945 by Time-Life Books) and Crispin Gill's "Mayflower Remembered." The cast includes Phill Wright in the central role of Squanto, a humor loving storyteller who claims to be "the last Patuxet" and who weaves the production's various elements together. There will be three free performances, at 8 p.m. Thursday-Saturday in the Bountiful Regional Center, North Salt Lake. Tickets are not required; patrons are encouraged to arrive early for better seats. Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joshua Ligairi" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormons in Space Date: 04 Nov 2003 10:50:58 -0700 First off let me report that I DO listen to NPR now. That has not always = been the case. Back in my less mature high school days I listened to = Salt=20 Lake's X-96.3 and they had a segment on their morning-show called "SPACE = ELDERS" that found two Mormon Missionaries encountering evil = space-villains=20 (mainly from Star Trek and Star Wars) and attempting to turn their=20 mis-adventures into good teaching moments. It's been a few years, but I=20 remember it being quite funny. One of my favorite episodes was the = Elders'=20 encounter with the Borg Queen, oh, and the time they tried to teach a = first=20 discussion to some Ewoks. I have a Space Elders cassette tape somewhere, = but I'm sure an entire CD collection is available online by now. Josh -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] in favor of vitriol Date: 03 Nov 2003 19:44:12 -0700 On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:51:02 -0700 Barbara Hume writes: > I loved the portrayal of Mary in Scott Bronson's play STONES. It was > quite moving. It showed the human side of her, but also her strength. > When Jesus paid tribute to her influence on his life, I went > completely through one of the six packages of Kleenex I took to the > performance (knowing what Bronson's work always does to me). Thank you very much. Those are kind words. Reading that, it occurs to me that I seem to be trying to break all the rules: Men can't write from a woman's point of view; diety should never be given a voice in literature. I do my very best to adhere to the "anti-adverb" rule, but I suspect there are a few other rules to go after. scott -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eugene Woodbury" Subject: [AML] Harry on the couch Date: 04 Nov 2003 12:09:30 -0700 Another attempt to explain the Harry Potter phenomenon: the serendipitous amalgamation of time-proven formulas, echoing deeply resonating themes at the heart of the human experience. The first of which could be titled, "Plucky orphan saves day, pals help." Fascinating, this simple storyline is. Once you start thinking about it, you see it showing up all over the place. The appeal of the literary conceit is noted by Wendy Doniger in the London Review of Books, recounting a "particularly sharp 13-year-old [who] patiently explained to me that if Harry's parents weren't dead, there would be no point in writing the book: it wouldn't be interesting, no matter how many creative details there were." Doniger describes it as an "intrinsically charismatic" myth that "haunts the story of the ugly duckling, raised among scornful ducks until he discovers that he's really a swan. It haunts real-life adoption, too, fueling the obsessive search for biological parents, and. . . shape[d] the real-life story of JK Rowling[.]" Freud termed it the "Family Romance." Shiva Srinivasan puts it bluntly: "The family romance is a Freudian rite of passage that is initiated by the child's awareness of how boring his parents can be." The child, then, imagines that "he in fact is a prince, who is marked out for a greatness that his parents cannot even begin to imagine." Before being rescued by their "kindred spirit" guardians, Harry's and Anne's foster parents prove to be absolutely dreadful people. The Dursleys, writes Srinivasan, "are the very embodiment of boredom." Luke's foster parents, in contrast, are basically good people, and are immediately killed off. (Lucas wasn't taking any chances.) Extending the Freudian analysis even further, the orphan's newly acquired guardians represent "ideal" opposites on a maternal-paternal scale (rough & tough vs. strict but nurturing), who restore order after a fashion any child would desire. Consider these two cases at opposite ends of the genre spectrum, Anne of Green Gables and Star Wars. Anne of Green Gables Orphan: Anne Pals: Diana, Gilbert Parental figures: Marilla, Mathew Star Wars Orphan: Luke Pals: Princess Leia, Han Parental figures: Obi Wan, Vader (yes, Vader is an ideal type: my dad can beat up your dad, and rule the universe besides) Harry Potter Orphan: Harry Pals: Hermione, Ron Parental figures: Dumbledore, Hagrid In many contemporary versions (Artemis Fowl, The Golden Compass), the child is not orphaned (technically, neither is Luke), but the parents are conveniently shuffled off stage so as to produce the same effect. There's something to this trio business, as well. An accessible explanation of the Family Romance: http://books.guardian.co.uk/lrb/articles/0,6109,135352,00.html Spot the source: Harry Potter explained The London Review of Books by Wendy Doniger "Young Harry Potter's parents are dead. So far, so good[.]" "Myths survive for centuries, in a succession of incarnations, both because they are available and because they are intrinsically charismatic. Rowling is a wizard herself at the magic art of bricolage: new stories crafted out of recycled pieces of old stories." The English major version: http://www.biblio-india.com/articles/so00_ar20.asp?mp=SO00 Harry Potter and the Freudian Romance by Shiva Kumar Srinivasan "But why this fantasy? Why not something else? It is not that other fantasies will not work as a structural device in children's fiction. But rather that the historical appeal of this fantasy at this point in time lies in the fact that it addresses the predicament of the postmodern parent of the Anglo-American world. This parental figure is a necessarily humiliated figure, who lacks the excitement and dangers associated with the traditional paterfamilias who held the keys of life and death." Eugene Woodbury -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Marilyn Brown Novel Award Date: 04 Nov 2003 07:04:31 -0700 [Moderator's note: The Feb AML meeting will be Feb 21, but the place has = not been finalized. A call for papers will be coming out within the week = with that info on it. Currently the front-runner is the Salt Lake Public = Library] The February 21 AML meeting (Is that the correct date, AML board?) may = be held in Salt Lake City at the Westminster College where it has been held = for many years. However, there was a change in the conference (a good one, I might add) this year from Thanksgiving Point to the Provo Library, so anything may happen. Marilyn Brown ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 5:32 AM > The follow-up question is Where? For those of us who have to make = travel > arrangements. > > Beth Bentley > > > > >Thanks Darvell for asking, "When is the next Marilyn Brown Novel = Award=3D3D > > going > >to be presented?" > > > We will present a thousand dollars to the next Marilyn Brown Novel = Award > winner on February 23, 2004, or whenever the AML luncheon meeting is = held. > > Cheers! Marilyn [Brown] > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Nan P. McCulloch" Subject: [AML] Great Conference Date: 04 Nov 2003 14:34:19 -0700 What a great conference. When I saw all the snow I was not sure I wanted to drive in the stuff. I am so glad I did. Thanks to D. Michael, Melissa P. and all who did the work. We truly appreciate all you folks do for AML. The food was good too. The screening of the film _The Best Two Years_ was fun. Having sent 2 sons on missions, some of the stuff rang pretty true. It was entertaining. My workshops were good. Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury did a fine job on her 1000 Ideas in a Hour. We talked about the MICE of a story; whether it is about a place, an idea, a character or an event. Most stories are about people and what could go wrong. It is best to have the character do the solving. There is a price paid for the resolution. Fiction imposes meaning. Tessa Santiago is a real jewel. Her personal essays are marvelous. As a follower of Gene England, she does her mentor proud. She talked about a principled approach. Personal essays are not about us, but about our minutia. How much are we willing to bear to make our point. She referred to D&C 50. It is pretty clear we must search for truth in our works and call on the Spirit to assist us. We need not confess others sins. Edit with fire. Also, be willing to have no closure. Jongiorgi Enos gave a great presentation on Writer's Block: There's No Such Thing. Jon is a fun guy and he gave us some very useful information. Most of us are guilty of work avoidance behavior (WAB). We must discipline ourselves to stop WABing. Stress (fear) is our biggest enemy. Relaxation is the answer. We must learn the mental steps to turn off the fear/stress switch in our brain. If we are not producing we need to take a break, exercise, whatever and then come back fresh. We can detox our brain by trusting in God and casting our fears on Him. Creativity is good for our health. Writing helps our autoimmune system. Renewing our vows is detoxing. Thanks presenters for sharing with us. It was a great day. Nan McCulloch -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: starling@burgoyne.com Subject: Re: [AML] (SL Trib) Larry H. Miller as Movie Mogul Date: 05 Nov 2003 10:58:29 -0700 Van Gogh didn't have to share Larry Miller's philosophy about the need for financial success in making films. His works only cost a few dollars worth of paints and canvas to produce. It makes a difference when there are millions of dollars on the line. > Subject: Re: [AML] (SL Trib) Larry H. Miller as Movie Mogul > > Quote from Larry Miller: "If you aren't > > successful in financial ventures, you don't earn the right to keep > > doing them, and I don't care if you're selling cars or owning a > > basketball team or making films." > > Of course Larry is right in a way. But I am surely absolutely > breath-takingly relieved that Van Gogh didn't listen to this philosophy. > > > Marilyn Brown > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Date: 05 Nov 2003 15:16:46 -0700 starling@burgoyne.com Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:58 AM Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list Van Gogh didn't have to share Larry Miller's philosophy about the need for financial success in making films. His works only cost a few dollars worth of paints and canvas to produce. It makes a difference when there are millions of dollars on the line. > Subject: Re: [AML] (SL Trib) Larry H. Miller as Movie Mogul > > Quote from Larry Miller: "If you aren't > > successful in financial ventures, you don't earn the right to keep > > doing them, and I don't care if you're selling cars or owning a > > basketball team or making films." > > Of course Larry is right in a way. But I am surely absolutely > breath-takingly relieved that Van Gogh didn't listen to this philosophy. > > > Marilyn Brown > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Breaking the rules. . . . . Date: 05 Nov 2003 16:37:03 -0700 At 07:44 PM 11/3/03 -0700, you wrote: >Reading that, it occurs to >me that I seem to be trying to break all the rules: Men can't write = from >a woman's point of view; diety should never be given a voice in >literature. These are both silly rules. Of course a man can write from a woman's = point=20 of view, if he's taken the time to understand it. Or at least accept it, = recognizing what's different and what's the same. And I'm certain Milton = would cavil at the second rule you cite! This reminds me: I read an historical romance this past week that did=20 something I don't think a male-written book would ever have done. In = this=20 medieval story, the villain had been guilty of rapine, murder, and the=20 decimation of whole villages. He had tried to rape the heroine, and = tried=20 to kill the hero, in order to steal their lands. Near the end of the = book,=20 the time comes when hero and villain face each other for a one-on-one=20 swordfight that will determine who gets it all. Then you have a line = space,=20 and when you come back, the fight is over and the hero has won. There is = no=20 description of the combat at all! I was a bit disappointed, because I like to see well-muscled guys = swinging=20 swords and sweating, and I wanted to see the dastardly villain skewered. = But was nothing to the disappointment I feel when adventure books skip=20 right over the romantic parts, such as the proposal. In one of Patrick=20 O'Brian's novels, his sea captain hero climbs into a carriage with his = lady=20 love in order to win her acceptance of his proposal. Then the POV shifts = to=20 the hero's best friend, standing outside the carriage and stamping his = feet=20 in the cold. When the hero emerges from the carriage, he is betrothed.=20 Humph! say I. Later on, you discover that the lady is not enthusiastic=20 about the physical side of love, which is a terrible thing to do to a = hero,=20 since he doesn't find this out until after they are married. But then this book is written with a different audience in mind--one = that=20 is squeamish about different things than I am. Barbara R. Hume Provo, Utah=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Retell With Pride Date: 05 Nov 2003 16:40:24 -0700 At 05:38 PM 11/3/03 -0800, you wrote: >It's a sort of cultural baptism for the dead. The >filmmakers convert Austen's characters into young >Mormons, thus reassuring the audience that a cultural >icon like Austen would have been a latter-day saint, >if only she had had the chance:-) H'mm. She had a rather cynical and satirical turn of mind, and she was quite aware of the hypocrisy of her own society. She might have written some interesting columns for The Sugar Beet. Barbara R. Hume Provo, Utah -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Rex Goode" Subject: [AML] _BRADY_, Shelly: Ten Things I Learned From Bill Porter (Review) Date: 25 Oct 2003 06:47:46 -0700 Author: BRADY, Shelly Title: _Ten Things I Learned From Bill Porter_ Publisher: New World Library, Novato, California First Printing: April, 2002 Adults, Essay, Hardcover, 174 pages ISBN: I-57731-203-I Price (US): $20.00 In the late fall of 1998, millions of television viewers turned on ABC's= _20/20_ to be touched by the story of Bill Porter. Bill was a man afflicted with cerebral palsy who spent his days selling household products door to door.= The segment received the greatest response in the television program's long= history. Part of the story was about Bill's delivery person, who began working for= him at first in high school and then later, while attending college. This began a lifelong friendship that resulted in her writing this book about his life= story. Ten Things I Learned from Bill Porter was Shelly Brady's memoirs about the= life of her friend and employer. Not long after the book was first published, William H. Macy, the actor, purchased the rights to Brady's book to write and produce the television= movie, _Door To Door_. The film won six Emmy awards in 2003. What is not entirely= clear to Latter-day Saint readers and viewers is that the perky sidekick to Bill Porter, whom William H. Macy says is a "babe," is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and wife of a stake president. Though the book is a biography of sorts, it does not follow a chronological order in the telling. As the title suggests, it delineates ten lessons the author learned by observing and interacting with her friend. Inspirational topics, such as "Persistence Pays Off," and "If It Isn't Broken, Don't Fix= It," are the chapter headings which Brady uses to leverage her telling of Bill's story. One such chapter is the chapter is, "Live Your Values." In it, she= enumerates the Church's Young Women's values of "Faith, Divine Nature, Individual= Worth, Knowledge, Choice and Accountability, Good Works, and Integrity," while describing how Bill Porter exemplifies each one. Other than these= references, one would not necessarily identify Sister Brady as a Mormon, unless it is= the fact she has six children. The narrative is prosaic, down to earth, and easy to read. It is also= filled with emotion and innumerable tearful moments for the reader. Organizing the= book along the lines of lessons learned was a good choice. At then end of the= book are many pages of letters Bill received after the _20/20_ segment or other speaking engagements. The letters are followed by a short message from Bill himself. Though Bill Porter himself is not Mormon, he displays many attributes that= most Mormons will find appealing. For example, his ethics regarding his work are= that he does his job despite anything that might tempt him to do otherwise.= While most Mormons would not, in fact, behave with so much determination they= would think it highly respectable to do so. Bishops would especially like to see recipients of Fast Offering assistance adopt Bill Porter's devotion to his= work. Shelly Brady speaks extensively to sales organizations and does an= occasional fireside. Bill used to accompany her on her trips, but failing health has prevented him from travel. One thing she often speaks to is the differences between Bill's story and= the made-for-TV movie that garnered so much recognition. The movie is of good quality, but it takes many liberties with the story, to be expected from= the different medium. Still, the movie is well worth watching and captures a= good picture of the man's character, even if it gives a slightly distorted= picture of the man's history. The man that will be remembered by both the book and the movie will include an accurate memory of someone who never let serious challenges keep him from fulfilling his dreams. Rex Goode -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mary Jane Jones Subject: Re: [AML] Retell With Pride Date: 05 Nov 2003 20:04:38 -0500 For those of you interested in forming an opinion on this modern retelling of Pride and Prejudice, I have screening passes (each pass admits 2 people) to various screenings up and down the Wasatch Front (from Logan to St. George). I will send a screening pass to each of the first 20 AML-listers to email me (personally) and request one in your area. And, if you would like to see the trailer, you can view it online at www.PridePrejudice.com. Enjoy, Mary Jane Ungrangsee mjjones@xelent.com > From: Barbara Hume > Reply-To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 16:40:24 -0700 > To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [AML] Retell With Pride > > At 05:38 PM 11/3/03 -0800, you wrote: >> It's a sort of cultural baptism for the dead. The >> filmmakers convert Austen's characters into young >> Mormons, thus reassuring the audience that a cultural >> icon like Austen would have been a latter-day saint, >> if only she had had the chance:-) > > H'mm. She had a rather cynical and satirical turn of mind, and she was > quite aware of the hypocrisy of her own society. She might have written > some interesting columns for The Sugar Beet. > > Barbara R. Hume > Provo, Utah > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Harry Potter Date: 05 Nov 2003 21:28:54 -0700 [moderator's note: I am a bit concerned at the sarcastic tone being generated in this dialogue, and ask those who might respond to resist = any temptations to stray from the affable literary exchanges we hope to = promote on AML-List :)] =20 On Thu, 30 Oct 03 11:19:37 -0700, Eugene Woodbury wrote: > >Jacob Proffitt >[Most of the criticism of Rowling makes an absolute judgment that >her sentences are poor.] > >Dang right it does. Of what possible use would any other kind of >criticism be? "Absolute judgement" is, of course, in this respect, >an oxymoron. Any "judgement" is essentially a subjective opinion. >It can only be as absolute as the person offering it. That is why >"appeal to authority" is a logical fallacy. (One would have thought >that was implicitly understood.) > >When authority is cited in debate (as when a judge cites >precedent), the point is to qualify the reasons for making the >argument, not to posit the argument as ipso facto settled by >"authority" (unless we're talking about physical law, such as the >speed of light). I'm not so sure that's true. People appeal to authority all the time in = order to make the issue ipso facto settled by "authority". And even = when=20 authority is used merely to qualify reasons, I don't consider it to=20 *actually* do so. For the matter at hand, adverbs can be evaluated as=20 helpful or harmful without the need to qualify the reason with = statements=20 by Steven King. King's "adverbs are not your friends" is pithy and=20 certainly is a point worth bringing up, but referencing his = qualifications=20 as a writer isn't going to make that a more applicable statement. His=20 statements would be as valid (or not valid) if they were expressed by a = bum on the street or politician in city hall. >Though I am yet unconvinced. (If brilliant argument were always >convincing, then Plato would have a happy ending.) The counter- >argument then evolved into whether or not one has the "right" to >criticize Rowling's use of adverbials, or anything about her >writing at all, and whether such criticism might existentially >damage the spirits of young minds enamored of her prose. > >This is a complete non sequitur. I don't remember anybody questioning anybody's right to criticize = Rowling. =20 I remember distinctly most of the people who have responded to you = stating=20 multiple times that you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and not = only free but welcome to express it. The only qualms expressed were = done=20 so only insofar as your statements were taken to be an establishment of = rules of *all* good writing that should be endorsed by all who wish to=20 write well. >Jacob Proffitt >[That's fine, but again, you clearly described the "failings" of JK >Rowling.] > >And, again, you make it sound like I think she writes poorly (at times) > because she has a drinking problem or something. What I >wrote was, "Her way with WORDS is too often lacking. Or her editors >are too forgiving, too cautious, or just plain lazy. I haven't >decided who's to blame. By the forth installment, Rowling's skills >[as a writer--isn't the antecedent clear?] had fallen sufficiently >short to make obvious these and other failings [as a writer]." > >Hardly a "universal" characterization. For all I know, she makes a >great chocolate cake and she brakes for animals. Since this is a literary list and since our discussion has never had=20 *anything* to do with Rowling's personal habits (good or bad), I think = the=20 context is plenty clear that "universal" applies here to the rule=20 underlying your statements and not the author--that you have in effect=20 presented a rule that is universal and that all writers, in order to = not=20 fail as writers, must adopt this standard. >My biggest beefs with Rowling are obviously with her use of >adverbials and with the plotting of book IV (which MAKES NO SENSE). >Writing poorly (at times; I have insisted again and again that >Rowling does not write poorly ALL of the time; so far she seems to >be writing well about 75 percent of the time, a passing grade) is a >problem easily remedied. Um. Assuming it *is* a problem. I don't think it is which is why we're = having this conversation. I think your proposed remedy might be worse, = for her core audience, than this supposed "problem". >Jacob Proffitt >[What rules? Who made these rules?] > > >Good question! Like ending sentences with periods. Like spelling >"right" with that unnecessary "gh" in the middle. Why not make >periods little round circles like in Japanese? Why not "rite"? You >know, like the drug store? (Think of all the paper and ink >cumulatively saved!) Who makes up these rules? Who enforces them? >Who goes to jail when they are broken? Wasn't James Joyce once >banned because of his sentence construction? (Well . . . no.) I'm not sure why you responded in this way. The context makes it = abundantly clear that the rules referred to by me are your implied rules regarding = adverbials and saidisms (among others). Did I *ever* mention periods,=20 spelling or going to jail? And I was particularly careful not to = question=20 the concept of rules or standards as such. >In the meantime, I do have to wonder what those poor professors of >English are supposed to do with their careers, as there are no >rules, no objective standards according to which they may fairly >judge the work of their students. Run-on sentences? Who knows, >maybe it scans better that way. A's for everybody! Good point. Did you really want to discuss objective standards in = writing? I'm not sure because this seems rather sarcastic and not presented as a = serious concern. >(If you were to do a meta study on all the books ever written about >writing, including King's, you could, in fact, easily distill down >a dozen or so "rules" that talented writers across the board >believed made writing better. Read enough bad student fiction, and >you'll be pasting those rules to their foreheads.) A) Just because a lot of good writers agree on a set of rules doesn't = mean=20 that those rules are necessarily valid. Even a general consensus can = be=20 wrong. B) Writers almost never agree fully with one another, even the=20 really good ones. C) You assume that all writing is the same--that the = rules of a set of favored literary writers would actually apply to = someone=20 writing for, say, young readers. Frankly, I don't think "easily" is a=20 valid modifier for distilling down all the books ever written about=20 writing. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Alan Rex Mitchell" Subject: Re: [AML] GUNN, "Smart Single GUys" (DN) Date: 06 Nov 2003 05:43:08 -0700 I went to SSG last night and had a good time. The band was good, the acting good. I took my 12 year old son and he thought the skater dude was the funniest. That and the rap song and dance about the Mario Brothers game (I think you need to sit in the middle to get the best effect on that one.) I liked the short, "film within a play" call Guys in Suits, but the film documenting the skater dude was not as funny as the "real" dude with his voice over telling his scattered thought process while his surrounding was muted, "Dude, the only thing that would make this better is nachos. Sweet!" To me, the play had a Samuelsen feel to it (comparing it to his play about a singles ward that played in Orem last year). I don't know if that was because he directed it, or if Tony GUNN is a protege. But it is funny. The hometeacher steals the girlfriend. The scientist student does beat poetry. The only love interest that works out is the hiccup girl. The climax to the play, (a water fight) was either the comic pinnacle or a beginning playwrights way out of the mess--I haven't decided which. (Memo to GUNN: You left Sarah hanging--probably because it was too predictable, but what if you paired Casey with Lindsey in consoling, then had her splash her love interest--he needed to wake up anyway.) All in All, a lot of fun. I had to laugh at Chris telling how film was a more valid medium than plays (!) Alan ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 5:08 PM > This is a very nice preview for a very very fun show. Any of y'all > interested in Mormon drama, this is a funny one. Whether it's actually > also, you know, good, you will, of course, judge for yourselves. Tony > Gunn is a very savvy young writer. > > Couple things to add: first of all, I did not call the show a > 'multi-media smorgasbord,' but now that I see it on the page, I rather > wish I had. Second, if you come see it, arrive early. We have a live > band, Robot Ghost, who are, in my opinion, terrific. Basically a jazz > combo, with some funk and R&B elements. Cast members will also sing > with the band from time to time. > > Eric Samuelsen > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Hall > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:22 AM > To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [AML] GUNN, "Smart Single GUys" (DN) > > Sunday, November 2, 2003 > 2 original works open this week > By Ivan M. Lincoln > Deseret Morning News > > "SMART SINGLE GUYS," an original comedy by Tony Gunn, will have its > world premiere this week at Brigham Young University. According to director > Eric Samuelsen, the play is a "multimedia smorgasbord," interweaving comedy > sketches, rap and a couple of songs to relate the story of three male > BYU students and their involvement in the complicated world of dating. The > playwright and director have worked together before. Last year Gunn > directed one of Samuelson's scripts for the Villa Playhouse in > Springville. > Discounted previews are Wednesday and Thursday, after which it will > continue through Nov. 15 on Wednesdays-Saturdays at 7:30 p.m. in the > Margetts Theatre. There will also be one matinee, Nov. 15 at 2 p.m. > The cast includes Hillary Akin, Hollie Beard, Matthew R. > Carlin, Forrest Foster, Tomm Hiatt, Tim Lewis, Eugene McEntire, Michael > Padekin, Shelby Pinney, Renny Richmond, Aaron Watts, Steve Watts and Jed > Hirschel Wells. > Tickets are $12 for general admission seating and $9 for students or > BYU faculty/staff. For reservations call 801-378-4322. > > "SAINTS AND STRANGERS," a new musical drama about the Pilgrims' voyage > on the Mayflower, is co-produced by the Bountiful Performing Arts > Center, Dale White Productions, the National Mayflower Society and the > Bountiful Utah Central Stake of the LDS Church. White, a former Hollywood > actor-director-producer and now living in Bountiful, has written and > directed the production, inspired by the book by George F. Willison > (published in 1945 by Time-Life Books) and Crispin Gill's "Mayflower > Remembered." The cast includes Phill Wright in the central role of Squanto, > a humor loving storyteller who claims to be "the last Patuxet" and who > weaves the production's various elements together. > There will be three free performances, at 8 p.m. Thursday-Saturday in > the Bountiful Regional Center, North Salt Lake. Tickets are not required; > patrons are encouraged to arrive early for better seats. > > Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sugar Beet Subject: [AML] Going Postal Date: 06 Nov 2003 08:25:21 -0800 The Sugar Beet Goes Postal Now that we've finished the spiritual creation of The Sugar Beet, we're ready to create it physically. In January 2004, Mormonism's most compelling news reportage will begin appearing on a thin, smooth substance called paper. Yes, paper. These bimonthly paper editions will be delivered to paying subscribers by the U.S. Postal Service. Yes, paying subscribers. Introductory subscription rate: $19.95 for 6 issues We invite you to become a charter subscriber to our new print edition. Use the PayPal link at http://www.thesugarbeet.com, or mail your check for $19.95 to The Sugar Beet, PO Box 1086, Orem, UT 84059. Don't delay, or you'll miss our premiere printed issue, which is sure to become a collectible! We apologize in advance for any paper cuts we may cause you. This Christmas, don't give sugarplums; give The Sugar Beet. For gift subscriptions, click here: http://sugarbeet.c.tep1.com/maabC0Uaa1RZgbemu1ye/ To view a sample issue of The Sugar Beet, click here: http://sugarbeet.c.tep1.com/maabC0Uaa1RZhbemu1ye/ For information on advertising in The Sugar Beet, click here: http://sugarbeet.c.tep1.com/maabC0Uaa1RZibemu1ye/ For retail and wholesale distribution information, click here: http://sugarbeet.c.tep1.com/maabC0Uaa1RZjbemu1ye/ We'll see you in print! -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Annoying thingies in posts Date: 06 Nov 2003 11:09:26 -0700 [moderator's confession: We are rotating the moderator responsibilities and so there have been a few kinks as this duty has changed hands and computers. Do let us know when AML-List service has not been at its optimum and we'll try to fix it. This problem should be solved but chime in if it hasn't been] At 04:37 PM 11/5/03 -0700, you wrote: >Of course a man can write from a woman's =3D >point=3D20 >of view, Isn't there some way we can keep this listserv from putting those annoying=20 =3D20 thingies in? My other mailing lists, even the ones on the dreaded=20 Yahoo, don't do this. I've skipped reading some posts because they were=20 loaded with this distracting stuff. barbara hume --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D67374F06=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii; x-avg=3Dcert; x-avg-checked=3Davg-ok-308D2C68 Content-Disposition: inline --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/03 --=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D67374F06=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D-- -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Breaking the rules. . . . . Date: 06 Nov 2003 11:49:29 -0700 The brilliant British playwright David Edgar recently visited the BYU campus and gave two wonderful talks, one of which, I understand, might be suitable for publication in Irreantum. At any rate, he was asked about the question of a white male heterosexual middle class playwright who regularly creates characters who are of different ethnicities (and of course genders) from his. His response was beautiful. He said "I was once very much concerned about this question. And of course, whenever one writes about something outside one's own experience, one has an obligation to research very thoroughly indeed. But I came to realize that the consequences for writers NOT writing about characters from different ethnic backgrounds than my own were far more negative than for us to write about them." I'm paraphrasing, and darn awkwardly too, but I do agree with him. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] The AML Conference Date: 06 Nov 2003 23:17:49 -0700 I braved the storm from Centerville to Provo and attended the AML conference as well. I got to meet many AML people face to face, which was a delight, enlightening and profitable. I now know why Jon Enos can post such wonderfully thought out, and lengthy posts on such a regular basis--he's warming up, you know--and seeing him function at full tilt, he has energy to burn. I enjoyed listening to all he had to share in the screenwriting class...which at first glance seemed to be some sort of priesthood meeting. I was afeared I'd wandered into the wrong place, but Scott Bronson kindly sat by me and made me feel at home. Then another woman or two came in...but why, oh why did the men so far out number women in that venue, when there was such an even mix in attendance. Most interesting. I think most of the women were in the children's and middle grade writing courses. Is that where you were, ladies? I also was the happy recipient of two offers to read unpublished manuscripts (got them both by the way, guys, thank you!)...so you see, profitable. It was also profitable for me to take the workshop from Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury and Carol Lynch Williams (I hope I got that right...I know for sure it was Kathleen, and I was late coming in to the workshop, so I just picked up names from things that were said...if I'm wrong sorry, and someone correct me). It was enlightening to listen to what was offered to others workshopping their few paragraphs, but mostly good to hear feedback on what I brought. Thanks to the organizers for thinking that up, I appreciated the opportunity. They were two candid and talented women sharing their thoughts as writers and readers. I always LOVE that the Red Leaf bookstore is there and it was profitable for them, from me at least, as I spent over $100 on books...it's my sickness, I know. But what a joy to find good LDS literature all stacked up there. I'm reading LOVE CHAINS, a short story collection by Margaret Young first...and oh, my heck (a total Utahism)it's brilliant. Her essay about sharks in the first of it is gut honest. As is each story I've read so far. And, oh yes, I'm alternating moments in the bath and in bed reading between LOVE CHAINS and Louise Plummer's essays THOUGHTS OF A GRASSHOPPER. I'm so glad to know there are other non-ants out there. When she confessed to all the stuff they found under their bed when cleaning it I felt vindicated. My friend gave me a bookmark that reads "One of the advantages of being disorderly is that one is constantly making exciting discoveries" (A.A. Milne) My life is full of excitement. And I know both of these titles are "old" (like nearly 10 years), but to me they are new. Thanks to both Louise and Margaret for writing them. What else? Oh, yes. Kristen Randle was a fireball, and I got the only copy of SLUMMING Red Leaf had there. Yeah me! I only listened to Kristen for an hour (had to leave to make the workshop), but felt she was one of those people of definite opinions who make good columnists or teachers because they believe so passionately in their point of view and communicate it clearly and with dry humor. I appreciated what she shared even if I disagree with her belief that men writing from a woman's perspective rarely get it right. There might be a lot that get it wrong, but there are a goodly share who have impressed me: Wally Lamb was the first who sprang to my mind. She even mentioned Alexander McCall Smith (#1 Ladies Detective Agency), so I don't think she was saying "never" but she certainly didn't hold out much hope. The people from Excel Entertainment who presented a bit about the making of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE: A LATTER-DAY COMEDY were interesting too. I appreciated hearing about the process they went through adapting, casting, etc. The bits of the film they brought to share made me anxious to see it. My favorite part was the group discussion about "LDS literature: Where is it headed?". Unfortunately, I had to leave early...can anybody clue me in on what the upshot was? I left during the part where we were deciding that LDS authors as a whole have to get braver about telling their own personal truths. Especially unfortunate in that I missed going out to dinner and socializing more. Sigh. That's the way of life sometimes. Other commitments. If you missed this, plan on coming to the one in February. Kim Madsen -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Jvkwriter@aol.com Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 6:08 PM From katie@aros.net: I opted not to go to the AML Writers Conference for =3D a number of family reasons, but I'm dying to find out what I missed! I'm =3D sure there are lots of other folks around who weren't able to = go, and I =3D imagine that folks who did go would enjoy discussing the experience, so... I watched the screening of the movie "The Best Two Years" I was =3D surprisingly impressed and can't wait for it to come out in February because I know = =3D that my husband will love it. I felt it was very true to the missionary experience, and well filmed. I attended Rick Walton and Julie Olsen's class on Children's Literature. =3D I=3D20 learned a lot specifically about the way this market = works.=3D20 Next I attended Tessa M Santiago's class on Personal Essays. This class =3D was=3D20 excellent as it clarified some cloudy areas in my mind = between personal essay and personal history or story writing. Her examples supported her points excellently. I felt it was very beneficial and interesting. The last class I attended was Jongiori Enos class on Writer's Block. I=3D20 already agreed with his premise about writer's block but I did = not know that's where he was going when the class started. Actually, if I tell =3D the truth here, I took his class because I wanted to hear him speak after reading so many of his posts. I thought his class was vibrant and energizing which is a feat in =3D itself,=3D20 being the last class of the day following a buffet Mexican luncheon that almost required a siesta after the eating experience. He balanced his information in a general or worldly sense with the principles that LDS people are supposedly living. I think many LDS =3D struggle with incorporating some of their beliefs and still being part of the =3D world. He spoke frankly to some of these issues. I did not = feel his lecture was preachy in any way nor did I think it was at all patronizing. He had several points to make and he made them clearly and concisely, = =3D and=3D20 with enough generated enthusiasm to excite one to run right = home and =3D write=3D20 something. I cannot comment on any other classes but what I participated in was =3D well=3D20 worth my time, and effort to be there. One final comment. = During the =3D movie and panel discussion I counted the number of women in attendance and =3D then the number of men in attendance. This is the = very first writer's =3D conference I have ever attended where the number of = men equaled the number of =3D women. I was pleasantly surprised and pointed = it out to the people around me. That's all I have say . Janie Van Komen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Clark Goble Subject: [AML] My Web Page Date: 07 Nov 2003 04:46:30 -0700 Spurred on by jealousy of Nate Oman's excellent resources for Mormon=20 philosophy I've finally got my site partially up. It's still very=20 early on but I thought I'd post the link here. Ideally what it will be is a place for me to flesh out a few sets of=20 ideas. First off some of the discussions I've had here which I've=20 kept. But more significantly my studies on the philosophy of Pratt,=20 Leibniz and Mormonism in general. In addition the front page will be a=20 blog on items of Mormon philosophy I've found. It obviously is more=20 than a little influenced by the Metaphysical Elders site. I hope Nate=20 takes imitation as the sincerest form of flattery. I do hope, however,=20 to take things down a slightly different route given my own focus on=20 more ontological matters. http://www.libertypages.com/clark/ As I said it is still a work in progress. So I'll more than likely be=20 adding a lot more pages over the next few days. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 07 Nov 2003 15:23:27 -0700 On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 04:46:30 -0700, Clark Goble wrote: >Spurred on by jealousy of Nate Oman's excellent resources for >Mormon=3D3D20 philosophy I've finally got my site partially up. It's >still very=3D3D20 early on but I thought I'd post the link here. > >http://www.libertypages.com/clark/ > > >As I said it is still a work in progress. So I'll more than likely >be adding a lot more pages over the next few days. Cool. Any chance that you'll RSS enable it? Please? RSS Reader is = my=3D friend... Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] More Moderator Confessions Date: 07 Nov 2003 17:06:05 -0600 Folks, Just so you know, Jacob Proffitt and Gideon Burton have been doing a great job at taking care of this moderation thing while I've been largely out of pocket. Some posts have been referred to me from October that I haven't had a chance to respond to yet, and some of the technical problems on the list probably have something to do with my unavailability to help with matters, so Jacob and Gideon have been left to figure things out largely on their own. Apologies, and thanks again to them for stepping up to the plate. Jonathan Langford AML-List Coordinating Moderator jlangfor@pressenter.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: RE: [AML] Breaking the rules. . . . . Date: 07 Nov 2003 17:09:39 -0600 Eric gave us: >"But I came to >realize that the consequences for writers NOT writing about characters >from different ethnic backgrounds than my own were far more negative >than for us to write about them." Lovely. Certainly it's risky to do this--but then I think that writing has to take risks to be worthwhile. (This example illustrates, by the way, that true risk-taking does not have to be doctrinal, or moral, or ethical; it can be--most often is, perhaps--artistic.) Jonathan Langford Speaking for myself jlangfor@pressenter.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Susan Malmrose" Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 07 Nov 2003 15:27:13 -0800 Lookin' good Clark! Cute puppy. :) Who else has a webpage? Mine is hosted by a friend and therefore not exactly reliable (server occasionally goes down), but I'll include the URL below. I know there used to be a "AML Living Room" with an index of people's pages, but last time I looked at it I don't think it'd been updated for a long time. Can we get a compilation post of everyone's URL's if they want to share them? Susan Malmrose http://qsysue.tagplazen.org/ -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] The AML Conference Date: 08 Nov 2003 11:04:41 -0700 <002f01c3a4f6$e1716140$74a20a18@kimcjc> In-Reply-To: <002f01c3a4f6$e1716140$74a20a18@kimcjc> Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 23:17:49 -0700, Kim Madsen wrote: >I braved the storm from Centerville to Provo and attended the AML >conference as well. I got to meet many AML people face to face, which >was a delight, enlightening and profitable. I now know why Jon Enos can >post such wonderfully thought out, and lengthy posts on such a regular >basis--he's warming up, you know--and seeing him function at full tilt, >he has energy to burn. I enjoyed listening to all he had to share in the >screenwriting class...which at first glance seemed to be some sort of >priesthood meeting. I was afeared I'd wandered into the wrong place, but >Scott Bronson kindly sat by me and made me feel at home. Then another >woman or two came in...but why, oh why did the men so far out number >women in that venue, when there was such an even mix in attendance. >Most interesting. I think most of the women were in the children's and >middle grade writing courses. Is that where you were, ladies? Some of us were in the hallway working. :) I did get to talk to Jon briefly about the subject (another side benefit Of hanging out in the hall) and how to find screenplays to read. He mentioned a publication called, I think, Script, which prints screenplays from classic and current films and would be available through some libraries. Last night Jacob found me another resource called Script-O-Rama. It's a general screenwriting site, but they have all sorts of scripts posted--drafts, shooting scripts, revised version. The URL is: http://www.script-o-rama.com/table.shtml I don't know if I'll ever actually write a screenplay, but at least I can have fun reading scripts in the meantime. Melissa Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 10 Nov 2003 10:43:15 -0700 Approved: cracker=20 Last night, we had the rare opportunity to watch one of two made for TV fact-based movies, the one on Elizabeth Smart and the one on Jessica Lynch. I watched The Elizabeth Smart Story, then switched to Jessica on commercial breaks. I suppose it counts as Mormon lit. The Elizabeth Smart Story surprised me. The approach was low key, and quiet, a good deal less sensational than most teleplays in the genre, and it hewed fairly close to the facts, at least as far as I know them. I did follow the Elizabeth Smart story with some interest, but I certainly don't presume to know it well enough to know exactly when they took artistic license. I did notice a few liberties: when Elizabeth was found by Sandy police, she did eventually--after a twenty minute interview--say 'thou sayist it.' I don't believe she added 'I say it.' I think they were trying to make Elizabeth appear just that tiny bit more volitional, just a tad less brainwashed. Understandable, and I didn't mind it. I do know that they didn't have the Smarts escort Elizabeth through a huge crowd of media when they took her home from the station. The teleplay really downplayed the sexual aspect of Elizabeth's kidnapping, and frankly, I was glad. Mitchell did call her his 'wife,' and a note at the end referred to him being formally charged with aggravated sexual assault. That's enough. Elizabeth's ordeal was horrific enough; they didn't need to sensationalize the worst part of it.=20 I read one review of the movie that criticized the acting. Frankly, I thought Dylan Baker was fine as Ed Smart. I thought he met what seems to me a tremendous challenge; playing a decent human being trapped in an awful situation and dealing with it as best he could. It was a quietly effective, non-histrionic performance. I also liked Lindsay Frost as Lois Smart; again, she was quietly believable throughout. The scenes where you see the pressure the kidnapping put on their marriage were very well done, I thought. Again, nobody screamed at anyone; they played it as two basically decent people, committed to each other and to their family, but genuinely disagreeing on how to proceed.=20 The scenes with Amber Marshall as Elizabeth and Tom Everett as Mitchell were less effective. Everett played Mitchell as a more or less generic religious loon, instead of as a specifically Mormon loon. The writing led him that direction, of course, but still, I didn't hear Mitchell's former connections to Mormon culture in his speech patterns, in the falling inflections and the word emphases peculiar to our culture.=20 At the same time, I'm a bit relieved that that choice was made. Frankly, I think most folks are able to see that it wasn't Mormon culture or Mormon theology that produced Mitchell. Mental illness is what produced him. But while our culture didn't produce him, it did provide him with his unique vocabulary. Mormonism played a very small role in this movie, and that was fine with me.=20 We didn't need to see much of Emmanuel's wanderings. Elizabeth may indeed have tried as intrepidly to escape as she did in this movie, but it's inconsistent with what else we know of the story. But really, the story here is of Ed Smart, and his persistent unwillingness to give up. He's the only person who initially believed Mary Catherine's identification of Emmanuel (which still seems to me quite wonderful and miraculous), and he's the only person who really did anything about it. The Salt Lake police come across as well-intentioned bozos in this movie, and that's all to the good. There's not much question that they blew the case five ways from Wednesday. I especially liked their repeated assertions that 'we're doing all we can,' and 'trust us, we know what we're doing.' And I thought Baker's gradual disillusionment with such comments was very nicely portrayed. I thought it was quite a well done film, given that it was a made for TV movie. And there's one last thing I need to say about it. There's been a terrific amount of criticism aimed at Ed Smart in the Salt Lake papers, and in the national media as well. He's seen as someone who is cynically using his daughter's kidnapping for personal gain, as a publicity hound, and so on. I'm quite astounded at how willing good Utah Mormons are to judge the man. Let me just say a few=20 things: first, we have absolutely no right to judge his decisions anyway; second, there was going to be a movie and a book anyway, so why not cooperate and retain some control of content?; third, the Smarts are giving most of the money to charity, and fourth, Ed Smart has an agenda, and has had since this event. He's been pushing for the Amber law. He's been pushing for changes in how the FBI handles these sorts of cases. And he wants to provide hope for other families facing similar tragedies.=20 I'm just glad his daughter is home and safe. I'm glad Mitchell and Wanda Barzee are in prison. I'm really happy for Angela Ricci, whose husband's good name was dragged through the mud the way it was. (SLC police were so tunnel vision obsessed with Richard Ricci, they ignored far more plausible potential suspects, and that was very well portrayed.) And I'm glad the movie was what is was, quiet, nonsensational, reasonably non-sectarian. And over. The Jessica Lynch movie, on the other hand, looked awful, what I saw of it. But that's another subject altogether. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Anne Bradshaw" Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 07 Nov 2003 20:27:11 -0700 Hello! I'm new to AML and I do have a web page. It is www.annebradshaw.com . I write LDS fiction and have two published novels out there--"Terracotta Summer" and its sequel, "Chamomile Winter". I have many articles on LDS websites, and have contributed to the New Era for endless years. And I'd like to say a big THANKYOU, THANKYOU to whoever it was that rescued me after the AML Conference at Provo Library. My car battery was dead (I inadvertently left the lights on all day after getting there in the early, dark, snowbound hours). One kind lady tried to help me work out the problem but we couldn't solve it--no electrics worked, and I discovered afterwards when telling the tale to an amused husband, I'd been hitting the trunk button instead of using the hood lever!! It WAS dark, remember :-) Everyone left, the lights were dimming downstairs (some other event going on upstairs), the caretaker lady said I could stay for a 'little while longer'. I 'phoned home--and cell phones of various family members--no response, not one. I was cold from trudging back and forth to the car in the dark, freezing car park-- tired and lonesome--pretty despairing actually. At that point I finally remembered to pray--and felt dumb for not doing so earlier. About 10 minutes later, a gentleman came through the door (turned out to be the husband of the lady who offered help earlier). They decided to come back and help me! I'd be glad to know their names (they were carrying boxes of stuff--must have been organizers or presenters) so I can thank them for being in tune, and tell them they were used by Heavenly Father that night to answer a prayer. Anne Bradshaw www.annebradshaw.com www.latterdayauthors.com ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 4:27 PM Lookin' good Clark! Cute puppy. :) Who else has a webpage? Mine is hosted by a friend and therefore not exactly reliable (server occasionally goes down), but I'll include the URL below. I know there used to be a "AML Living Room" with an index of people's pages, but last time I looked at it I don't think it'd been updated for a long time. Can we get a compilation post of everyone's URL's if they want to share them? Susan Malmrose http://qsysue.tagplazen.org/ -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] STEWART, "Farewell to Eden" Date: 10 Nov 2003 01:46:39 +0000 Sunday, November 9, 2003 'Farewell to Eden' is festival entry for UVSC By Ivan M. Lincoln Deseret Morning News "FAREWELL TO EDEN," a new drama by Utah Valley State College student playwright Mahonri Stewart, will premiere Thursday through Nov. 22 in the school's Black Box Theatre. According to faculty member James Arrington, who has worked with Stewart on developing the script, it has "the same sensibility as works by Jane Austen, Charles Dickens or Charlotte and Emily Bronte." Set in England in 1840, the play will be UVSC's entry in the American College Theatre Festival competition. Arrington, who is directing, notes that Stewart's play contains historical LDS Church characters as it focuses on the proselyting effort in Great Britain at the time. The central characters are three recently orphaned, but adult, Highett siblings -- Georgianna, Catherine and Thomas. According to Arrington, "This is an intelligently plotted and sometimes jaw-dropping story with lots of humor to carry it." Stewart, a UVSC sophomore, recently won third place in the Ruth and Nathan Hale Comedy Playwriting Contest. The cast includes Margie Johnson, Brandon West and Amber Jones as the three Highetts, with Angela Youmans, Sam Schofield, Aaron Wilden, Ken Brown, Sam Davis, Russ Bennett, Tatum Langton and Fallon Hanson in other roles. "Farewell to Eden" will play Thursday-Saturday of this week, and Nov. 19-22 the following week, all at 7:30 p.m. The Black Box is in Room 617 of the Gunther Trades Building. Tickets are $8 for general admission, $6 for students, senior citizens and children, and $4 for UVSC students. For reservations, call 801-863-8797. Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] GUNN, "Smart Single Guys" (DN Review) Date: 10 Nov 2003 12:06:21 +0000 Monday, November 10, 2003 'Single Guys' at Y. smart and funny It's a bird's-eye view of lives, loves of students By Genelle Pugmire Deseret Morning News SMART SINGLE GUYS, Margetts Theatre, BYU, Provo, through Nov. 22 (801-378-4322). Running time: 2 hours, 15 minutes (one i ntermission). It takes about five minutes after you leave the Margetts Theatre to realize the message in Brigham Young University's production of "Smart Single Guys" isn't about the comedy, which there is plenty of, but what lies behind the humor -- the workings of the single male psyche. Playwright Tony Gunn's award-winning script, coupled with the directing talents of Eric Samuelsen, gives the audience a bird's-eye view of the lives and loves of a handful of male students sharing an apartment at the Y. The cast is a skillful group of actors who look comfortable on stage with their characters. At first glance you might assume some of these guys aren't acting at all. A case in point is when one of the roommates puts his name on the new gallon of milk, and then one by one the rest of the apartment starts borrowing, even drinking right from the container. Throughout the night the audience is introduced to men and women and their daily encounters, from the botched online blind date to the "thanks for dating me, but I think I'll stay with my fiance" moment. The conversation between a dude and his "inner" dude is just bizarre. And the videos within the play are a great addition. My favorite is "Men in Suits." Along with the great cast is a talented instrumental combo that sits to one side in the apartment and adds flare to comments as well as musical entertainment before, during and after the show. The set is simple and looks a lot like the girl's apartment from BYU's production of "Joyce Baking" from five years ago. The interaction with the audience is also fun. Beware of water. A few of the inside jokes may go over the heads of some in the audience, but for those who went there or are going to BYU, they are hilarious. Even a few recognizable professors are in the mix. "Smart Single Guys" provides an evening of entertainment and reflection. Caution to those singles out there: If you take a date, make sure your relationship is solid, and plan for discussion time afterward. Copyright 2003 Deseret Morning News -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 07 Nov 2003 16:56:16 -0700 > Lookin' good Clark! Cute puppy. :) >=20 > Who else has a webpage?=20 > Susan Malmrose Well, I have one for my band Organic Greens (which actually managed to transfer well to Austin, Texas from Utah since one other band member also moved to Austin - we just played at the Austin Celtic Festival) at: http://organicgreens.freeyellow.com Not much there, and it needs updating badly, but it has some song files up. Also, I have a fanboyish website dedicated to the Marvel comic book character Ghost Rider at: http://wolfefam.homestead.com/files/grinto.htm really only of interest if you read supernatural based comics. This one is sporadically updated (usually when I have free time, and as I move towards the PhD, that gets less and less). FWIW. --ivan wolfe -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] The Sugar Beet paper edition (SLT) Date: 10 Nov 2003 12:16:37 +0000 November 10, 2003 Web spoof of Mormons spawns a paper edition By Thomas Burr The Salt Lake Tribune It's by Mormons, for Mormons, about Mormons and it could be landing in mailboxes soon. For a small fee, this publication will provide insight and news about the LDS Church and its culture, with items such as: * Seagulls attack Main Street Plaza protesters. * Deseret Book schedules 'book burning.' * Gold plates discovered on Titanic wreckage. * Bishop storehouses now stocking Prozac. OK, it isn't the Ensign. Nor the LDS Church News. Nor a ward newsletter. It's The Sugar Beet -- a satirical Web site that has been lampooning Mormon culture for nearly two years -- and is now going to print. So will Mormons subscribe? Right now, they can view the not- so-saintly spoof from the privacy of their computers. A hard-copy edition could be spotted by a spouse, a parent, a child, a neighbor or, heaven forbid, the bishop. "We're going to mail it in plain, brown envelopes," jokes Associate Editor Chris Bigelow. "And people can keep it under their mattresses if they want." Not that it's Playboy. Or even a Robert Kirby column in The Salt Lake Tribune. But it is a "guilty pleasure" for many Mormons, Bigelow says, who most probably won't want to display it on their coffee, er, Postum tables. In what started as a way to coax button-down Mormons into laughing at themselves, The Sugar Beet now attracts some 11,000 people monthly to http://www.thesugarbeet.com, editors say. The site was modeled after The Onion, a groundbreaking satirical Web site that pokes fun at current headlines. Now, after 25 editions, the Beet goes on. The past few Web issues carried "scoops" about Elvis' posthumous baptism, Walt Disney's honorary sainthood and an elderly couple's mission to Crossroads Plaza. Oh, and the gospel now comes in a "refreshing mint flavor," the LDS Church has patented "Holy Ghost," and the Fox network is debuting a sitcom titled "The Polygamist." The Beet's first print edition comes out in January, editors say, and readers can subscribe at $19.95 for six editions a year. Editor Todd Petersen, an English professor at Southern Utah University, says the magazine is just the first step of what could become a line of Sugar Beet products. The next project is The Sugar Beet Guide to Mormons, a Mormonism for Dummies-type book, Petersen says. LDS Church officials declined to comment on the Beet, but editors say no one associated with the site has been called on the carpet. "Only a couple people have told us we're blithering idiots," Petersen says. And the tongue-in-cheek site, apparently, has its fans. "My wife and I laughed together for the first time in years," wrote in one reader. "Maybe you have saved my marriage." "How about the prophet letting you guys write some of the conference talks?" asked another. Still another wrote: "My testimony is renewed. You folks make me so proud to be a Mormon." Of course, not everyone likes -- or gets -- the satire. "You guys sure take some stuff lightly," said a first- and, perhaps, only-time reader. "Do you wonder if God cares?" Yes, editors say. But they don't jest about LDS leaders or about deeply rooted Mormon doctrine, they say, because the Beet is not about cynicism but rather the sometimes-comical LDS culture. "There's only one thing you can do if you live in Utah: You can be funny or you can be a nerd," Petersen says. "We're funny nerds." Editors say they hope the magazine will make enough to cover expenses. The print plans were announced Thursday, and subscriptions already are flowing in. Editors also hope to snag readers at newsstands -- if they can find willing sellers. Don't expect to find The Sugar Beet at Deseret Book, though. Said Petersen: "They're going to put it right next to Richard Paul Evans' [The Last Promise]" -- on the store's do-not-stock list. Copyright 2003, The Salt Lake Tribune.=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Aitken, Neil" Subject: RE: [AML] My Web Page Date: 07 Nov 2003 16:08:33 -0800=20 Ok, I'm game. I looked for the AML Living Room, but evidently it's now offline (at least the link is broken). I think a compilation post would be good -- sort of an index of who's who on AML. In fact, it might be nice to resurrect the AML Living Room and have a page of profiles and links so that we might all become a little more familiar with each other and where we're coming from. Here's my webpage. =20 http://www.lone-crow.com Best wishes, Neil Aitken -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 3:27 PM Lookin' good Clark! Cute puppy. :) Who else has a webpage? Mine is hosted by a friend and therefore not exactly reliable (server occasionally goes down), but I'll include the URL below. I know there used to be a "AML Living Room" with an index of people's pages, but last time I looked at it I don't think it'd been updated for a long time. Can we get a compilation post of everyone's URL's if they want to share them? Susan Malmrose http://qsysue.tagplazen.org/ -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature Vivendi Universal Games- http://www.vugames.com :=20 The information transmitted is intended only for the=20 person or entity to which it is addressed and may=20 contain confidential and/or privileged material of=20 Vivendi Universal Games which is for the exclusive=20 use of the individual designated above as the=20 recipient. Any review, retransmission, dissemination=20 or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance=20 upon, this information by persons or entities other=20 than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you=20 received this in error, please contact immediately=20 the sender by returning e-mail and delete the=20 material from any computer. If you are not the=20 specified recipient, you are hereby notified that=20 all disclosure, reproduction, distribution or action taken on the basis of this message is prohibited. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Nan P. McCulloch" Subject: [AML] Us and Them Date: 10 Nov 2003 23:58:07 -0700 The theme of our recent conference was on my mind when I read this quote in _National Review_. This is from the Happy Warrior Mark Steyn _Workin' the Jew Angle_. But the general point that Jews have prospered by developing forms of universal appeal is a sound one, at least in America, at least in popular culture--Hollywood, Broadway, Tin Pan Alley. Gay novelists may write gay novels, African-American poets may pen African-American poetry, but *Jewish movie executives* just make movies. Nan McCulloch -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 11 Nov 2003 09:38:08 -0700 Eric Samuelsen's sensible review of the Elizabeth Smart movie heightened my sense of his "right on" ability to make accurate comments about our burgeoning Mormon artistic endeavors. I too was SO GRATEFUL that the "sensationalized" facts of the case were downplayed. I agreed with everything you said, Eric. However, I think I'm remembering correctly (because I heard the same stories you did) that she said, "Thou saith," in the movie. And even if she added "I say it," it still sounds pretty crazy if we're to take the speech of teenagers today into consideration. What an ordeal! We have to consider that she was in a "marriage." I thought it was accurate and spectacular that she said "What's going to happen to them?" (The criminals.) By now of course she cared. With Katie Kouric (sp?) I thought it was interesting that she said, "It is as though it never happened." I know that took time, and the effort of many people (wisely including professional help) for her to reach this healthier state of mind(though the effects of course will always be with her). But her parents are good people. Oh, how I wish every abused child were cared about like the Smarts cared about her. As for the fact that people are jumping on the band wagon to denigrate Ed Smart--I appreciate your comments on that, Eric! I heard that and I about got sick! It is BECAUSE the Smarts were willing to come forward that the film doesn't have the "sensationalized" garbage in it. We all know what happened. But it wasn't necessary to put it into the film! The Smarts wanted to control this potentially harmful piece from the beginning. Actually, it shows how our terrible stories can be told without garbage in them. I wonder if we as a list (if we have people who agree with Eric and me) might write emails to Ed Smart telling him of our complete support (by the way, I thought Dylan Baker did very well also--as well as others!)? Does anyone have the Smart email address or their home address? I would just like for some of us to assure them (as artists, particularly) that we don't see it that way. The family is NOT benefiting or "exploiting." They were generous to SHARE this with us because an entire nation CARED. Their authorization was obviously a way of PROTECTING THEMSELVES from a very hungry and jaded media. I applaud their limited appearances and the way they have managed to maintain a good deal of their privacy (such as when Elizabeth first came home, she was wisely not seen). When they got all those offers for this and that, of course they did the right thing.=20 Marilyn Brown ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 10:43 AM > Approved: cracker=3D20 > > Last night, we had the rare opportunity to watch one of two made for TV > fact-based movies, the one on Elizabeth Smart and the one on Jessica > Lynch. I watched The Elizabeth Smart Story, then switched to Jessica on > commercial breaks. I suppose it counts as Mormon lit. > > The Elizabeth Smart Story surprised me. The approach was low key, and > quiet, a good deal less sensational than most teleplays in the genre, > and it hewed fairly close to the facts, at least as far as I know them. > I did follow the Elizabeth Smart story with some interest, but I > certainly don't presume to know it well enough to know exactly when they > took artistic license. I did notice a few liberties: when Elizabeth was > found by Sandy police, she did eventually--after a twenty minute > interview--say 'thou sayist it.' I don't believe she added 'I say it.' > I think they were trying to make Elizabeth appear just that tiny bit > more volitional, just a tad less brainwashed. Understandable, and I > didn't mind it. I do know that they didn't have the Smarts escort > Elizabeth through a huge crowd of media when they took her home from the > station. > > The teleplay really downplayed the sexual aspect of Elizabeth's > kidnapping, and frankly, I was glad. Mitchell did call her his 'wife,' > and a note at the end referred to him being formally charged with > aggravated sexual assault. That's enough. Elizabeth's ordeal was > horrific enough; they didn't need to sensationalize the worst part of > it.=3D20 > > I read one review of the movie that criticized the acting. Frankly, I > thought Dylan Baker was fine as Ed Smart. I thought he met what seems > to me a tremendous challenge; playing a decent human being trapped in an > awful situation and dealing with it as best he could. It was a quietly > effective, non-histrionic performance. I also liked Lindsay Frost as > Lois Smart; again, she was quietly believable throughout. The scenes > where you see the pressure the kidnapping put on their marriage were > very well done, I thought. Again, nobody screamed at anyone; they > played it as two basically decent people, committed to each other and to > their family, but genuinely disagreeing on how to proceed.=3D20 > > The scenes with Amber Marshall as Elizabeth and Tom Everett as Mitchell > were less effective. Everett played Mitchell as a more or less generic > religious loon, instead of as a specifically Mormon loon. The writing > led him that direction, of course, but still, I didn't hear Mitchell's > former connections to Mormon culture in his speech patterns, in the > falling inflections and the word emphases peculiar to our = culture.=3D20 > > At the same time, I'm a bit relieved that that choice was made. Frankly, > I think most folks are able to see that it wasn't Mormon culture or > Mormon theology that produced Mitchell. Mental illness is what produced > him. But while our culture didn't produce him, it did provide him with > his unique vocabulary. Mormonism played a very small role in this > movie, and that was fine with me.=3D20 > > We didn't need to see much of Emmanuel's wanderings. Elizabeth may > indeed have tried as intrepidly to escape as she did in this movie, but > it's inconsistent with what else we know of the story. But really, the > story here is of Ed Smart, and his persistent unwillingness to give up. > He's the only person who initially believed Mary Catherine's > identification of Emmanuel (which still seems to me quite wonderful and > miraculous), and he's the only person who really did anything about it. > > The Salt Lake police come across as well-intentioned bozos in this > movie, and that's all to the good. There's not much question that they > blew the case five ways from Wednesday. I especially liked their > repeated assertions that 'we're doing all we can,' and 'trust us, we > know what we're doing.' And I thought Baker's gradual disillusionment > with such comments was very nicely portrayed. > > I thought it was quite a well done film, given that it was a made for TV > movie. And there's one last thing I need to say about it. There's been > a terrific amount of criticism aimed at Ed Smart in the Salt Lake > papers, and in the national media as well. He's seen as someone who is > cynically using his daughter's kidnapping for personal gain, as a > publicity hound, and so on. I'm quite astounded at how willing good > Utah Mormons are to judge the man. Let me just say a few=3D20 > things: first, we have absolutely no right to judge his decisions > anyway; second, there was going to be a movie and a book anyway, so why > not cooperate and retain some control of content?; third, the Smarts are > giving most of the money to charity, and fourth, Ed Smart has an agenda, > and has had since this event. He's been pushing for the Amber law. > He's been pushing for changes in how the FBI handles these sorts of > cases. And he wants to provide hope for other families facing similar > tragedies.=3D20 > > I'm just glad his daughter is home and safe. I'm glad Mitchell and > Wanda Barzee are in prison. I'm really happy for Angela Ricci, whose > husband's good name was dragged through the mud the way it was. (SLC > police were so tunnel vision obsessed with Richard Ricci, they ignored ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] Writing from another POV Date: 10 Nov 2003 19:17:49 -0700 "I appreciated what she shared even if I disagree with her belief that men writing from a woman's perspective rarely get it right. There might be a lot that get it wrong, but there are a goodly share who have impressed me: WallyLamb was the first who sprang to my mind." I've only read one of his, _She's Come Undone_, and I think he did remarkably well with the female perspective--with one major exception that pulled me right out of the story. Without getting graphic, let's just say he apparently believes an old wive's tale about female response. If his editor was a woman, shame on her for letting that one get through. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > far more plausible potential suspects, and that was very well > portrayed.) And I'm glad the movie was what is was, quiet, > nonsensational, reasonably non-sectarian. And over. > > The Jessica Lynch movie, on the other hand, looked awful, what I saw of > it. But that's another subject altogether. > > Eric Samuelsen > > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Alan Rex Mitchell" Subject: Re: [AML] The Sugar Beet paper edition (SLT) Date: 10 Nov 2003 19:24:21 -0700 Arithmetic check. > November 10, 2003 > "There's only one thing you can do if you live in Utah: You can > be funny or you can be a nerd," Petersen says. "We're funny > nerds." To which I say: Todd Petersen, Chris Bigalow, and I are two of a kind. Alan Mitchell -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: [AML] Review of private viewing of "THE PASSION" movie Date: 11 Nov 2003 09:37:21 -0700 Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2003 1:23 PM Here is an interesting review of Mel Gibson's upcoming controversial movie. What is different about this review is the author has actually seen the movie versus all those that have bashed it based upon pre conceived ideas. This controversial movie is going to be one shown for many years, just like the ten commandments... Mr. Fournier was among those present at a private viewing of the film. Deacon Keith A Fournier is a constitutional lawyer and a graduate of the John Paul II Institute of the Lateran University, Franciscan University and the university of Pittsburgh. He holds degrees in Philosophy, theology law. He has been a champion of religious liberty and appeared as co-counsel in major cases at the United States Supreme Court. He is the author of seven books and, along with his law practice, serves as the president of both the "Your Catholic Voice Foundation" and "Common Good". Here is what he had to say about the movie: I really did not know what to expect. I was thrilled to have been invited to a private viewing of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion," but I had also read all the cautious articles and spin. I grew up in a Jewish town and owe much of my own faith journey to the influence. I have a life long, deeply held aversion to anything that might even indirectly encourage any form of anti-Semitic thought, language or actions. I arrived at the private viewing for "The Passion", held in Washington D.C. and greeted some familiar faces. The environment was typically Washingtonian, with people greeting you with a smile but seeming to look beyond you, having an agenda beyond the words. The film was very briefly introduced, without fanfare, and then the room darkened. From the gripping opening scene in the Garden of Gethsemane to the very human and tender portrayal of the earthly ministry of Jesus, through the betrayal, the arrest, the scourging, the way of the cross, the encounter with the thieves, the surrender on the Cross, until the final scene in the empty tomb, this was not simply a movie; it was an encounter, unlike anything I have ever experienced. In addition to being a masterpiece of film-making and an artistic triumph, "The Passion" evoked more deep reflection, sorrow and emotional reaction within me than anything since my wedding, my ordination (Deacon), or the birth of my children. Frankly, I will never be the same. When the film concluded, this "invitation only" gathering of "movers and shakers" in Washington, D.C. were shaking indeed, but this time from sobbing. I am not sure there was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been glad-handing before the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak because words were woefully inadequate. We had experienced a kind of art that is a rarity in life, the kind that makes heaven touch earth. One scene in the film has now been forever etched in my mind. A brutalized, wounded Jesus was soon to fall again under the weight of the cross. His mother had made her way along the Via Della Rosa. As she ran to him, she flashed back to a memory of Jesus as a child, falling in the dirt road outside of their home. Just as she reached to protect him from the fall, she was now reaching to touch his wounded adult face. Jesus looked at her with intensely probing and passionately loving eyes (and at all of us through the screen) and said "Behold I make all things new." These are words taken from the last Book of the New Testament, the Book of Revelations. Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. They had been borne voluntarily for love. At the end of the film, after we had all had a chance to recover, a question and answer period ensued. The unanimous praise for the film, from a rather diverse crowd, was as astounding as the compliments were effusive. The questions included the one question that seems to follow this film, even though it has not yet even been released. "Why is this film considered by some to be "anti-Semitic?" Frankly, having now experienced (you do not "view" this film) "the Passion" it is a question that is impossible to answer. A law professor whom I admire sat in front of me. He raised his hand and responded "After watching this film, I do not understand how anyone can insinuate that it even remotely presents that the Jews killed Jesus. It doesn't." He continued "It made me realize that my sins killed Jesus" I agree. There is not a scintilla of anti-Semitism to be found anywhere in this powerful film. If there were, I would be among the first to decry it. It faithfully tells the Gospel story in a dramatically beautiful, sensitive and profoundly engaging way. Those who are alleging otherwise have either not seen the film or have another agenda behind their protestations. This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. It is a profound work of art. Yes, its producer is a Catholic Christian=20 And thankfully has remained faithful to the Gospel text; if that is no longer acceptable behavior than we are all in trouble. History demands that we remain faithful to the story and Christians have a right to tell it. After all, we believe that it is the greatest story=20 ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest right is the right to hear the truth. We would all be well advised to remember that the Gospel narratives to which "The Passion" is so faithful were written by Jewish men who followed a Jewish Rabbi whose life and teaching have forever changed the history of the world. The problem is not the message but those who have distorted it and used it for hate rather than love. The solution is not to censor the message, but rather to promote the kind of gift of love that is Mel Gibson's filmmaking masterpiece, "The Passion". It should be seen by as many people as possible. I intend to do everything I can to make sure that is the case. I am passionate about "the Passion." You will be as well. Don't miss it. And, I would like to add these thoughts. This film is going to receive=20 more scrutiny and be the focus of more public debate than any film EVER. The argument that this film is anti-Semitic will be played 1000's of time a day in every household across America... across the world. To me...a most crucial "discovery" of this man's "experience" is the reality that "my sins killed Jesus." The full weight of this truth is enormous! What an opportunity for millions and millions of people to "discover" this through the film. So... I encourage you to think carefully about how you're going to respond to the "debate" because there will be one. It's a great opportunity to witness about what it means to be a Christian... and nowhere is it appropriate or biblical to point a finger at the Jewish race. To do so is to stand squarely in His face and say... "You died for nothing!" Please pass this along to your Christian friends and family... to those=20 that will truly understand the message... so that they can be prepared to respond in such a way that bears a positive witness to Jesus' death and resurrection. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathy Wilson Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 13 Nov 2003 10:45:24 -0700 Susan asks: Who else has a web page? I'm hoping to get one up but in the meantime I have had a serendipitous web experience. Years ago I found a website called Bizy Moms, www.bizymoms.com. Moms at home can write about their home businesses. I wrote about mine, blithely, and before long I was getting all sorts of inquiries about doing editing/ghosting/writing. Turns out Bizy Moms is an AOL site and if you type in ghostwriter, mine is often the first or second hit, if you're on AOL. The inquiries rise and fall with the economy, but it's been an interesting way to get business, all unbeknownst :). Here's the URL: http://www.bizymoms.com/ideas/ghost.html Cathy Wilson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: [AML] Quote of the day Date: 12 Nov 2003 07:27:54 -0700 This is my new motto: My play was a complete success. The audience was a failure. -Ashleigh Brilliant, writer (1933- ) scott -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] SCOTT ANDERSON, _The Best Two Years_ Date: 11 Nov 2003 17:16:33 -0700 THE BEST TWO YEARS A film directed by Scott S. Anderson Produced by Michael Flynn Screenplay by Scott S. Anderson To be released February 2004 by Harvest Films Distributed by Halestorm Entertainment "Quality Fluff" Richard Dutcher (why is it so hard to avoid mentioning his name when=20 discussing an LDS film, even one he had nothing to do with?) didn't=20 create the new genre of LDS film--he blew it away. His first two films,=20 _God's Army_ and _Brigham City_, established a nonexistent film genre=20 and set the bar for quality right from the beginning. It's been all=20 downhill ever since. To date, as an LDS film critic, my list of quality LDS films has been=20 very short: _Brigham City_ is the best, followed by _God's Army_, and=20 the barely noticed _Out of Step_ a distant third. _Charly_ was a=20 borderline movie, and all the others (that I've seen so far) fall under=20 that borderline of quality. I despaired of ever seeing another film that could be added to the quality side of that list until Zion Films=20 released the next Dutcher movie. But at the recent Association for Mormon Letters' fifth annual writers=20 conference, I had an opportunity to view a pre-release screening of the=20 film _The Best Two Years_. It's with no small sense of satisfaction that I'm able to add a fourth LDS film to the list of worthy additions to the genre. _Best Two Years_ falls squarely into third place, edging _Out of Step_=20 into fourth. Dutcher still reigns supreme, but the list of worthy lords=20 surrounding the king is finally growing after a long period of stagnation. What makes _Best Two Years_ a bronze medalist instead of silver or gold=20 is the fact that it's pure fluff. The plot is anorexically slim; the=20 climax as predictable as a Scooby-doo episode. But that doesn't harm the film, because that's all the film was ever intended to be. As fluff, it=20 succeeds admirably. As some lightweight, pleasant entertainment for an=20 LDS audience, it scores in all the required categories. _Best Two Years_ chronicles the day-to-day experiences of a district of=20 LDS missionaries stationed in the Netherlands. We join them as the=20 obligatory new greenie shows up, communicating in a language that none=20 of the railroad station officials can identify. The other missionaries=20 are familiar characters, including the one who has lost his zeal for the work, and maybe his testimony as well. The screenplay gets the job done, the acting serves the screenplay well, and the technical results are of adequate quality. Nothing overly=20 glowing here, but a competent effort that delivers. The plot exists to support the laughs, which come at a regular=20 frequency. It's not the slapstick bellylaughs of _It's a Mad, Mad, Mad,=20 Mad World_ (although some of the comedy does edge precariously close to=20 over-the-top), but the sort of comedy that arises out of the characters=20 and the situations they find themselves in. The serious moments are=20 gentle and effective--and thankfully sparse, because, after all, this=20 _is_ fluff. No attempt was made to justify this lighthearted piece of=20 entertainment with A Message so the filmmakers could be sure their=20 efforts were Building the Kingdom. And in the process, they _did_ build the kingdom. They created a film=20 that told a Mormon story with real (slightly exaggerated) Mormon=20 characters full of the sort of foibles one would expect from human=20 beings, even human beings engaged in the Lord's work. But never is the=20 dignity of the work itself compromised. It's just the sort of thing the=20 art of the Kingdom needs right now to crawl its way out of the=20 club-over-the-head approach to uplifting entertainment. Scott Anderson, the writer/director, adapted this film from a stage play he'd written some time ago. Perhaps that seasoned heritage is why the=20 film works so well. Halestorm is the company Anderson chose to=20 distribute the film. It's the first film Halestorm will be distributing=20 that it didn't produce itself. This film may be the film that puts Halestorm on the map as a=20 respectable contender in the LDS film industry. Until now, all they've=20 distributed are their own forgettable comedies, which made many Mormons=20 laugh for a moment, but are poorly designed to withstand the judgment of time. _Best Two Years_ has the quality to withstand. If its foundation=20 isn't quite rock, at least it's concrete, and will weather the storm of=20 criticism much better than the sandy foundations of _Singles Ward_ and=20 _The R.M._ The irony is not lost on me that the film that could make=20 Halestorm respectable is a film they didn't produce. But I give them credit for recognizing a film that is quality when it=20 came their way. _Best Two Years_ fits right into their modus=20 operandi--lighthearted comedic fluff--but does so at a level of quality=20 that is to be applauded--and seen. --=20 D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eugene Woodbury" Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 11 Nov 2003 10:16:07 -0700 > Who else has a webpage? > Susan Malmrose http://www.eugenewoodbury.com is mostly concerned with anime, manga, and other things Japanese. Plus, a semi-autobiographical, unpublished novel, some bibliographic materials, and various ad hoc pontifications. Eugene Woodbury -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jamie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 11 Nov 2003 21:11:36 -0500 Eric Samuelsen: >The writing >led him that direction, of course, but still, I didn't hear Mitchell's >former connections to Mormon culture in his speech patterns, in the >falling inflections and the word emphases peculiar to our culture.=20 There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? ~Jamie Laulusa -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 11 Nov 2003 12:48:46 -0700 At 04:56 PM 11/7/03 -0700, you wrote: >Who else has a webpage? I have one at www.storyengineer.com The Story Engineer: Barbara R. Hume Unleashing the power of story to promote your mission and message (801) 765-4900 barbara@techvoice.com www.storyengineer.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [AML] The AML Conference Date: 13 Nov 2003 10:10:56 -0700 Thanks to the AML conference and Jon Enos's class, I just finished my movie script today. 96 pages. Yes, it probably needs editing. Yes, I had the idea and notes for it before. (And yes, it is media that avoids description and has a hard time telling what people think or true spirituality.) However, it can tell what they want. Now I need Jon Giorgi to tell me how to proceed. Alan Mitchell -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] LDS comedy DVDs review (DN) Date: 13 Nov 2003 10:14:35 +0000 Thursday, November 13, 2003 LDS-comedy DVDs aren't great laugh fests By Chris Hicks Deseret Morning News Here are some new DVD releases, starting off with a pair aimed directly at the Mormon market. "It's Latter-day Night!" (Halestorm, 2003, not rated, $16.95). Apocryphal or true, the story goes that Oscar-winning character actor Edmund Gwenn (best known as Santa in "Miracle on 34th Street") was on his deathbed when he famously said, "Dying is easy, comedy is hard." In LDS circles that might be paraphrased as "Clean is easy, funny is hard." Stand-up comedy has always been split into two camps -- those who do blue material and those who keep it clean. But it's more difficult these days to find the clean comics. Even Jay Leno, who was once the king of clean comedy on the stand-up circuit, has gone blue over the past decade while hosting the "Tonight Show." So Halestorm -- the guys who, for good or ill, brought us "Singles Ward" and "The R.M." -- are to be congratulated for attempting to demonstrate with this-straight-to-DVD show that clean stand-up comedy is still around and still has a place in the mix. But whether it's funny is perhaps more subjective. This 81-minute presentation of five male stand-up comics -- who are all LDS, and who all take pride in keeping it clean -- are actually funnier here when they stick to Mormon-specific themes. The opener, Shawn Rapier, begins his set with a hysterically funny lampoon of a stereotypical sacrament-meeting talk. But, sadly, nothing that follows -- by anyone -- manages to reach that height again. As Rapier begins a series of self-deprecating fat jokes, he begins to sound like any number of comics who appear on Comedy Central's stand-up programs but whose names quickly fall from memory. Likewise, Adam Johnson and the more manic, pratfalling Michael B (who occasionally resorts to Gallagher/Carrot Top props), are talented guys with some mildly amusing shtick, but their material is inconsistent. Jeff Birk, a sort of Mormon Jim Carrey, is wild-eyed, mugging and all over the stage, but he lacks discipline and polish. And the less said about the Apple Brothers, the better. I also found the "commercial" spoofs (a killer handcart, a werewolf missionary) more amusing for their central ideas than their execution. More successful is Dave Nibley, wearing a suit and tie (a la Seinfeld), and whose (mostly domestic) observations, while not atypical, hit the mark more than some of his colleagues' gags. (Local DJs Jimmy Chunga and Kelly Chapman host.) On the other hand, since comedy is so subjective, you may watch this and disagree with my views. The live audience here seems to be enjoying everything. Extras: Full frame, backstage clips, spoof commercials, Chunga's warm-up act, trailers, etc. "I Will Go and Do" (Liken the Scriptures, 2003, not rated, $19.95). Think of the "Book of Mormon Movie" as a low-budget, very broad musical comedy -- or perhaps a big-budget roadshow. That will give you some idea of what to expect from this 45-minute live-action adaptation of some of the stories from 1 Nephi in the Book of Mormon. This mix of farce and sentiment will probably appeal mostly to children, especially with its wraparound story of a young boy in Primary who learns a lesson in the scriptures. His imagination brings to life the story of Nephi's family wandering in the wilderness, mixing silly contemporary one-liners with song-and-dance musical numbers. And, eventually, they try to get the brass plates from Laban, portrayed here as an overeating fop. (There are even outtakes of actors laughing and flubbing lines under the end credits!) I found the comedy flat and the songs unmemorable, but it's not a bad Family Home Evening video for families with young children. Parents can doze until it's over. Extras: Widescreen, audio commentary, interactive game. Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: starling@burgoyne.com Subject: [AML] Re: Sugar Beet promotion Date: 13 Nov 2003 00:32:26 -0700 Sorry if I seem to be a prude, but as to the Sugar Beet coming out in print form, my vote is, "Don't bother". I actually used to like it the few times I visited their web site in the past, but several of the latest articles IMHO have crossed the line of good taste. I think you can be funny without getting dirty. (Now do I duck from the flames or "Stand for Something"?) Just my opinion, Robert Starling -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: [AML] Tracy and Laura Hickman in SLC and Pleasant Grove Date: 13 Nov 2003 12:05:08 -0700 I'm forwarding on this announcement from Tracy Hickman's newsletter: [moderator's note: If you are interested in viewing a comprehensive list of Tracy Hickman's publications, this can be found at the Mormon Literature Database at http://mormonlit.lib.byu.edu/lit_author.php?a_id=3D142] At 9:36 AM -0800 11/13/03, The Hickman Newsletter wrote: >In Salt Lake, Laura and I will be appearing at the Salt Lake City=20 >Public Library as part of their teens "Make a Racket" series on=20 >Friday and Saturday, November 21st and 22nd. Friday evening, at 7:00=20 >pm, Laura and I will be answering questions, signing autographs and=20 >talking about the latest developments in the Bronze Canticles=20 >series. Saturday morning we will be presenting our famous "Killer=20 >Breakfast" giving characters in Salt Lake the opportunity to make a=20 >lot of noise in the Library. That will be a lot of fun for all of=20 >us. You can read about our appearances and other game events at the=20 >library at: > >http://www.slcpl.lib.ut.us/events.jsp?parent_id=3D13&page_id=3D95 > >Laura and I will not be able to spend a lot of time there, however,=20 >as on that same Saturday, November 22nd, we will be making the trip=20 >south of Salt Lake to a somewhat smaller burg of Pleasant Grove,=20 >Utah to support the "Utah Sci-fantasy Festival" being held there for=20 >the very first time. Laura and I have done so many large conventions=20 >lately (Gencon & Dragoncon) with over twenty thousand attendees at=20 >each, we thought that it would be great to take advantage of this=20 >opportunity to support something that was just getting started.=20 >After all, it is the little neighborhood game store that got us into=20 >this business in the first place. You'll find Laura and I hobnobbing=20 >with folks right there in the basement of the Pleasant Grove Public=20 >Library at 30 E Center St. and part of your $10 to $15 admission=20 >costs go directly to supporting the library itself. So, if you=20 >happen to know where Pleasant Grove is and can get there, we hope to=20 >see you Saturday afternoon. You can check out the convention itself=20 >at the following link: > >http://www.fantasyrules.com/festival/index.html Whatever you think of his writing, Tracy Hickman has sold more copies=20 than most other Mormon authors (the only exceptions being Lund and=20 possibly Card). And he is a very entertaining and nice guy. For info about his new fantasy series, written with his wife, see=20 http://www.bronzecanticles.com Marny Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen Carter Subject: RE: [AML] Re: Sugar Beet promotion Date: 13 Nov 2003 10:03:10 -0900 >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Original Message From starling@burgoyne.com = =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >Sorry if I seem to be a prude, but as to the Sugar Beet coming out in >print form, my vote is, "Don't bother". Well, we are going to bother. We're trying to do something, not not do=20 something. >I actually used to like it the few times I visited their web site in >the past, but several of the latest articles IMHO have crossed the line >of good taste. Glad you've liked some of it. It's always intriguing to me to find out where people think the line is between good taste and bad. Where did you think we crossed it? And what sort of criteria did you apply to drawing that line? >I think you can be funny without getting dirty. (Now do I duck from the >flames or "Stand for Something"?) Yeah, like I was wondering, where were we dirty? >Just my opinion, Interested in hearing it. >Robert Starling Stephen Carter Fairbanks, Alaska -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 13 Nov 2003 16:58:00 -0500 --- Original Message --- >I wonder if we as a list (if we have people who agree with Eric and me) >might write emails to Ed Smart telling him of our complete support I didn't watch the Smart movie. Ed Smart scares me. It may be a visceral thing, because I can't put my finger on it, but he creeps me out. I didn't want to see the movie for that reason. I'm glad they found Elizabeth, however, and I think the SLC police ought to get a major kick in the keister for not showing Immanuel's picture sooner. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rose Green Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 13 Nov 2003 16:53:40 -0500 [moderator's caution: cultural issues such as regional dialects could quickly devolve into things not very focused on literary experience, so please use caution in pursuing this thread :)] >There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? Oh yes, Jamie, there definitely are. I would call it the Special=20 Voice. It even appears in sacrament meeting in other countries in other languages, by people who have been influenced by those good Saints and=20 missionaries from Utah. When you want to be really serious about=20 something, the intonation pattern at the end of every sentence has to=20 fall. Listen at your next fast and testimony meeting. Then there are=20 those phrases that people use in the church that of course don't have to come out in a non-church context, and of course not everyone uses=20 them--being grateful for the moisture we've received, the poor and needy, sick and afflicted, etc. (I think some time ago this was discussed on the list, so I won't go into it too much.) To get regional, since the Smarts are from Salt Lake, after all, perhaps the most distinguishing phonological feature is going to be that sharp-edged, clean-as-a-whistle, spectacularly American "r." Think of the dramatic opposite of the "Chahston," South Carolina "r," which basically doesn't exist. (Since I just moved to Charleston I notice this all the time.) Then in the Mormon Corridor (Alberta-Idaho-Utah-Arizona) you get this long "o" that shows up more or less, depending on where you are. It is less diphthonized as it is in the rest of American English. I didn't see the program, actually, but (not being from Utah), I sure do recognize that voice pattern! If I heard a person talking about anything, football, fishing, business, whatever, it would just fly out at me immediately, and I would instantly suppose that that person was LDS. Rose Green, writing from Chahston=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Shameless Self-Promotion: Mountain High Chorale Date: 13 Nov 2003 14:37:58 -0800 (PST) If you can get up to Heber City on November 22 you can catch the Heber Valley Arts Council presenting the Mountain High Chorale in concert with "An Evening of Americana." We will be singing music by Randall Thompson: selections from "Frostiana", a setting of Robert Frost poems; Aaron Copland, Four Quartets (this has been just recently published and our concert is the western U.S. premiere) plus selections from "The Tender Land" and "Old American Songs"; and Leonard Bernstein, selections from "Candide" and "West Side Story." The conductor is Murray Boren of BYU. I'm the big guy with the beard in the bass section. It's on Saturday, November 22 at 7:30 p.m. at the Heber 1st Ward, 325 East 500 North with free admission. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Tyner" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Sugar Beet promotion Date: 13 Nov 2003 11:26:01 -0800 No need to duck from the flames. ;-) But, if you are going to claim to "Stand for Something", then why not state exactly what articles bothered you and why? Instead of merely stating your opinion that the line of good taste has been crossed and one can be funny without being dirty. Tell us where we stumbled into the mists of darkness and how you think we could correct that. Then we can have a conversation about what a particular staffer had in mind when they wrote what they did. In other words, we can have a discussion about it and learn something new that either party may not have thought of before. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 11:32 PM > Sorry if I seem to be a prude, but as to the Sugar Beet coming out in > print form, my vote is, "Don't bother". >=20 > I actually used to like it the few times I visited their web site in the > past, but several of the latest articles IMHO have crossed the line of > good taste. >=20 > I think you can be funny without getting dirty. (Now do I duck from the > flames or "Stand for Something"?) >=20 > Just my opinion, > Robert Starling >=20 >=20 > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "BJ Rowley" Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 13 Nov 2003 13:26:04 -0800 Brown wrote: > ... >=20 > I wonder if we as a list ... > might write emails to Ed Smart telling him of our complete support (by > the way, I thought Dylan Baker did very well also--as well as others!)? > Does anyone have the Smart email address or their home address?=20 Ed & Lois Smart 1509 E Kristianna Circle Salt Lake City, UT 84103 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Reviews on Amazon Date: 13 Nov 2003 14:50:29 -0800 (PST) [Moderator's note: the link leads you to several book reviews by listmember R.W. Rasband - Jon Krakauer's book, the Nibley bio, etc.] Check out this About You area: =20 http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/cm/member-reviews/-/AGSWTH7SP2256/r ef=3Dcm_mpemr_rv/ =20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 13 Nov 2003 12:08:01 -0700 On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, at 10:16 AM, Eugene Woodbury wrote: >> Who else has a webpage? >> Susan Malmrose http://www.stevenkappperry.com & http://www.wordofmouthmedia.com -- although there's not much there at=20 the moment. Steve Perry -- skperry@mac.com Hear the latest "Cricket & Seagull Fireside Chat" at: http://www.meridianmagazine.com/radio -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronn! Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Sugar Beet promotion Date: 13 Nov 2003 17:17:12 -0600 At 12:32 AM 11/13/03 -0700, starling@burgoyne.com wrote: >Sorry if I seem to be a prude, but as to the Sugar Beet coming out in >print form, my vote is, "Don't bother". > >I actually used to like it the few times I visited their web site in >the past, but several of the latest articles IMHO have crossed the line >of good taste. Could you give some specific examples of items you thought crossed the line? >I think you can be funny without getting dirty. I agree. >(Now do I duck from the flames or "Stand for Something"?) No flames here. Just serious interest in what you think. If you (or Jonathan) prefer not to go into it on the list, feel free to=20 contact me privately at the address shown below. -- Ronald W. ("Ronn!") Blankenship mailto: ronn.blankenship@att.net -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S. Bezas" Subject: RE: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 13 Nov 2003 15:45:47 -0500 Oh, yes, most definitely, although I believe Eric may have been referring to Utah mormon-speak. I live in the southeast now. When individuals come to visit our ward, their Utah speech patterns and diction are quite apparent. In fact, when I first joined the church, I very much sounded like an "outsider" in my Mesa, Arizona ward. I despaired of ever speaking with the Utah "accent" most Mesa mormons spoke with! C.S. Bezas Board of Editors, Advisory Chair LatterDayAuthors.com http://www.latterdayauthors.com A Christian Lifestyle http://www.bellaonline.com/site/lds -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Jamie Laulusa Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 9:12 PM Eric Samuelsen: >The writing >led him that direction, of course, but still, I didn't hear Mitchell's >former connections to Mormon culture in his speech patterns, in the >falling inflections and the word emphases peculiar to our culture.=3D20 There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? ~Jamie Laulusa -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Review of private viewing of "THE PASSION" movie Date: 13 Nov 2003 16:10:00 -0700 ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 9:37 AM > Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the > wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His > face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. > They had been borne voluntarily for love. > > This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only > to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a > deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. > After all, we believe that it is the greatest story=3D20 > ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest > right is the right to hear the truth. > > > To me...a most crucial "discovery" of this man's "experience" is the > reality that "my sins killed Jesus." The full weight of this truth is > enormous! What an opportunity for millions and millions of people to > "discover" this through the film. So... I encourage you to think > carefully about how you're going to respond to the "debate" ____________________ This is a very good review of this visual art experience. I am glad I was able to read it. I had read some of the information on Mel Gibson's website about his reasons and passion for making it. From this reading, I have been looking forward to the release of *The Passion.* It sounds like my high expectations for this work will not be disappointed. I have only one slightly different take on this review, and I think it appropriate to express it, because it is not a comment on the work itself, which I have not experienced, but of the reviewer's comments about the work. The reviewer said that *The Passion's* message was, *My sins killed Jesus.* Yes he died for my sins, and the sins of all the world, but in my opinion it is rather presumptuous for humanity to make the claim that our sins killed Jesus who could not be killed. He died, voluntarily to make restitution for and redeem all the world for all the sins, oppression, sickness and disease, pains and suffering, caused by those sins. No one killed Jesus. He gave up his blood for us, but we did not nor could we kill him. Jesus died for us and his act of dying was strictly his own final act of condescension, because humanity was and is incapable of killing the Son of God. In fact I sometimes smile when I hear someone say, *Christ died for us.* Theoretically this is true, but the real message is, He laid aside his mortality and then was resurrected to take on immortality for us and that Christ lives for us. Regards, 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Review: Pride and Prejudice, a Latter-day Comedy Date: 14 Nov 2003 15:29:59 -0700 I saw a preview performance last night of the Pride and Prejudice movie. A whole bunch of disclaimers are in order: I worked on this a little; got a couple days in worth of script doctoring, uncredited. I know Andrew Black, the director, and Jason Faller, the producer/screenwriter. They're former students of mine, and guys I still think of as close friends. I have, therefore, a certain level of Pride in their achievement, and far too much Prejudice to even pretend to be objective. All that out of the way, it's pretty good. I love Jane Austen, have read all the novels, seen all the movies, including the TV miniseries lengthy treatment of this story. The most obvious thing to say about this film is that it's sort of like Clueless, only with Mormon characters. If you are the sort of Austen fan, like me, who liked Clueless, you'll like this too, and if you're the sort of Austen fan who hated Clueless, don't bother to see this one.=20 Seen strictly as a Mormon themed comedy, though, it's pretty good. It's got some life and pace and energy. It looks great. It looks like a film made by people who love movies. You see a VW driving through traffic, and it's accelerated, a la Guy Ritchie. The music is terrific; it sounds like the sort of music that people who love pop music listen to. It's minus the two devils that have plagued Mormon themed comedies heretofore; it doesn't have that horrid sanctimoniousness of some earlier efforts, and the acting is all pretty solid; which again hasn't always been the case.=20 I just finished talking to one of my colleagues, who was also there last night, about it. He thought it was very slow paced, especially early on. It took me some time to figure out what he was talking about. But he's right in this sense; the story progresses quite slowly initially. We don't learn much about the various characters or their relationships very quickly. And so, in terms of engaging us in character and story, it's slow paced. But that's not so important to me. To me, the early scenes in the movie established a visual style that the film generally sustained, and that style, that approach WAS fast paced. Hip, fresh, cool. And a breath of fresh air, frankly, given the visual dreariness of some of the Mormon films we've seen up to now. Basically, the story echoes Austen, except that Elizabeth, Jane, Mary, Lydia and Kitty are friends and roommates. Lydia and Kitty are sisters, and their parents own the apartment; Jane and Elizabeth are friends, and live there. Mary is socially inept, very well acted by Rainy Kerwin. Jane is imagined as an Argentinian beauty, with a strong Spanish accent. Elizabeth is a 26 year old college student, majoring in English (creative writing) at a place that closely resembles, but is not specifically named as, BYU. I assume she's meant to be a grad student; based on how she dresses, she's pretty obviously not an RM. Darcy is British, and LDS, imagined as a well-to-do publisher. Charles Bingley is a wealthy friend of Lydia's, conceived as sort of a goofy but pleasant eccentric. Jack Wickam is the villain of the piece. Mr. and Mrs. Bennett are entirely absent.=20 The Austen-to-BYU conversions are sometimes interesting, and sometimes rather strange. The class divisions of British society certainly have their Utah society counterparts, but the film doesn't seem to be making any particular statement about class; Darcy's wealth is more a plot convenience than any sort of satirical jibe aimed at East Bench Mormons. Elizabeth is supposed to be of modest means financially, but that's not really explored much, and certainly wealth or class aren't impediments to her relationship with Darcy. I really don't get why Jane is supposed to be from South America, but I thought Lucila Sola, as Jane, was reasonably interesting, if a trifle bland, in the role.=20 Like any romantic comedy, it works if we like the main couple and root for them to be together. At that level, Pride and Prejudice is very strong. Kam Heskin as Elizabeth and Orlando Seale as Darcy have great on-screen chemistry. Heskin is terrific, frankly. She's charming and funny and likeable. I loved a number of her acting choices. She goes running with Jane, and she clearly hates every minute of it; Sola runs with fluidity and grace, and Heskin runs like she's about to collapse and die at any minute. I buy that, and I like Heskin's willingness to look bad. Seale is equally convincing as both the superior snob and the sensitive and kind would-be lover. One subtheme throughout the film is something called The Pink Bible; a sort of Fascinating Womanhood-type book, which, in the world of the film, is supposed to be a huge Utah hit. Lydia and Kitty have the Pink Bible memorized, while Elizabeth, who has to keep restocking it at the book store where she works, hates it. It's a fun little motif.=20 I wish the writing were as strong as the performances. I was one of several writers who worked on it, and must bear my share of the blame for this, but the biggest difference between this film and Clueless is that Amy Heckerling is a funnier, wittier writer than any of us are. A subplot involving Collins (Hubbel Palmer) pursuit of Elizabeth was well acted, but the writing, especially of his proposal scene, was very flat, and the pace subsequently flagged.=20 And the film has one Death Wish Scene. (I've written about Death Wish Scenes before; Death Wish Scenes aren't just badly written scenes, their scenes so idiotically conceived that you wonder what in the world they were thinking.) Jane and Elizabeth have had setbacks. Elizabeth has misread Darcy, and Jane has been abandoned by Bingley. And so they binge out on ice cream and completely trash the apartment. For a week. They spend a week wallowing in misery, ice cream and pizza. (Oh, and apparently, there's a link between ice cream orgies and PMS. Who knew?) And then Lydia, brandishing the Pink Bible, saves them.=20 This is an insane scene, and I'm not just saying that because I tried to persuade Andrew to cut it and he didn't listen to me. I mean, that's okay; he's a talented young director, and why should he listen to me? But it's an awful scene, and what makes it worse is that, for the audience last night, it was clearly pretty funny. But we've come to regard Elizabeth as a sensible, confident, talented and bright young woman. And she has one little romantic setback--which for her character isn't even much of a setback, frankly; she's misjudged a guy she doesn't even like much, so what?--and drops out of life completely for a week? The very definition of a Death Wish Scene is a scene where a character does something utterly out of character, that makes us hate them, at a moment where, for narrative purposes, we need to like them. The Pink Bible stuff is very funny, but only because it involves satirizing ideas we all loathe, like basically all those found in Fascinating Womanhood. To have Elizabeth go off the deep end over nothing, and then have the Pink Bible save her? What were they thinking? It's also easily fixable. Just adjust the time frame. One day, sure, I buy that; you could decide to drop out and binge out for one day. A week; no way, and it's not funny, and I say that knowing that an audience last night though it was very funny. But it hurts the picture. The ending of the film is contrived, and the worst acting in the film takes place close to the end, in a Vegas wedding chapel sequence that just falls flat. All in all, the winding up of the various stories seems perfunctory, and strains credibility enough to undo a lot of what was accomplished earlier.=20 But all in all, the film still works reasonably well. It's far and away the best comedy among the Mormon films that have been released up to now. It's a far better film than Single's Ward. It doesn't make fun of Mormon culture like the Halestorm films do; it's just a nice retelling of a familiar love story, with characters who happen to be Mormon. At its best, Pride and Prejudice is a charming, pleasant romantic comedy, made with some real style and visual wit. I think it will be financially successful, and I'm rooting for it to be successful; it's a likeable film. I think it's a major step forward for the LDS film industry, and I'm excited to see Andrew Black's next film. He's a very gifted young director. Eric Samuelsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Review of private viewing of "THE PASSION" movie Date: 14 Nov 2003 08:32:47 -0700 > Here is an interesting review of Mel Gibson's upcoming controversial > movie. What is different about this review is the author has actually > seen the movie versus all those that have bashed it based upon pre > conceived ideas. > Thank you, Paris, for posting this review! It absolutely blew me away. I have been thinking about the "message" ever since I read this--how powerful this film can be to stir people to repentance! I am SO GRATEFUL for what happened in the screening. And I am hoping the film will shock people into getting their focus off sex and murder and graft. People KNOW what is right. They're weak, and they're just falling into ruts. Thank you for this, and I'm very anxious to see the movie! Cheers! Marilyn Brown ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 9:37 AM > From: Bud Gammon > Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2003 1:23 PM > Subject: Review of private viewing of "THE PASSION" movie > > > Here is an interesting review of Mel Gibson's upcoming controversial > movie. What is different about this review is the author has actually > seen the movie versus all those that have bashed it based upon pre > conceived ideas. > > This controversial movie is going to be one shown for many years, just > like the ten commandments... Mr. Fournier was among those present at a > private viewing of the film. Deacon Keith A Fournier is a > constitutional lawyer and a graduate of the John Paul II Institute of > the Lateran University, Franciscan University and the university of > Pittsburgh. He holds degrees in Philosophy, theology law. He has been a > champion of religious liberty and appeared as co-counsel in major cases > at the United States Supreme Court. He is the author of seven books and, > along with his law practice, serves as the president of both the "Your > Catholic Voice Foundation" and "Common Good". > > Here is what he had to say about the movie: > I really did not know what to expect. I was thrilled to have been > invited to a private viewing of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion," but I > had also read all the cautious articles and spin. I grew up in a Jewish > town and owe much of my own faith journey to the influence. I have a > life long, deeply held aversion to anything that might even indirectly > encourage any form of anti-Semitic thought, language or actions. > I arrived at the private viewing for "The Passion", held in Washington > D.C. and greeted some familiar faces. The environment was typically > Washingtonian, with people greeting you with a smile but seeming to look > beyond you, having an agenda beyond the words. > > The film was very briefly introduced, without fanfare, and then the room > darkened. From the gripping opening scene in the Garden of Gethsemane to > the very human and tender portrayal of the earthly ministry of Jesus, > through the betrayal, the arrest, the scourging, the way of the cross, > the encounter with the thieves, the surrender on the Cross, until the > final scene in the empty tomb, this was not simply a movie; it was an > encounter, unlike anything I have ever experienced. In addition to > being a masterpiece of film-making and an artistic triumph, "The > Passion" evoked more deep reflection, sorrow and emotional reaction > within me than anything since my wedding, my ordination (Deacon), or > the birth of my children. Frankly, I will never be the same. When the > film concluded, this "invitation only" gathering of "movers and shakers" > in Washington, D.C. were shaking indeed, but this time from sobbing. I > am not sure there was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been > glad-handing before the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak > because words were woefully inadequate. We had experienced a kind of art > that is a rarity in life, the kind that makes heaven touch earth. One > scene in the film has now been forever etched in my mind. A brutalized, > wounded Jesus was soon to fall again under the weight of the cross. His > mother had made her way along the Via Della Rosa. As she ran to him, she > flashed back to a memory of Jesus as a child, falling in the dirt road > outside of their home. Just as she reached to protect him from the fall, > she was now reaching to touch his wounded adult face. Jesus looked at > her with intensely probing and passionately loving eyes (and at all of > us through the screen) and said "Behold I make all things new." These > are words taken from the last Book of the New Testament, the Book of > Revelations. Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the > wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His > face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. > They had been borne voluntarily for love. > > At the end of the film, after we had all had a chance to recover, a > question and answer period ensued. The unanimous praise for the film, > from a rather diverse crowd, was as astounding as the compliments were > effusive. The questions included the one question that seems to follow > this film, even though it has not yet even been released. "Why is this > film considered by some to be "anti-Semitic?" > > Frankly, having now experienced (you do not "view" this film) "the > Passion" it is a question that is impossible to answer. A law professor > whom I admire sat in front of me. He raised his hand and responded > "After watching this film, I do not understand how anyone can insinuate > that it even remotely presents that the Jews killed Jesus. It doesn't." > He continued "It made me realize that my sins killed Jesus" I agree. > There is not a scintilla of anti-Semitism to be found anywhere in this > powerful film. If there were, I would be among the first to decry it. > It faithfully tells the Gospel story in a dramatically beautiful, > sensitive and profoundly engaging way. > > Those who are alleging otherwise have either not seen the film or have > another agenda behind their protestations. > > This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only > to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a > deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. > It is a profound work of art. Yes, its producer is a Catholic Christian=3D20 > And thankfully has remained faithful to the Gospel text; if that is no > longer acceptable behavior than we are all in trouble. > > History demands that we remain faithful to the story and Christians have > a right to tell it. After all, we believe that it is the greatest story=3D20 > ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest > right is the right to hear the truth. > > We would all be well advised to remember that the Gospel narratives to > which "The Passion" is so faithful were written by Jewish men who > followed a Jewish Rabbi whose life and teaching have forever changed the > history of the world. The problem is not the message but those who have > distorted it and used it for hate rather than love. The solution is not > to censor the message, but rather to promote the kind of gift of love > that is Mel Gibson's filmmaking masterpiece, "The Passion". It should be > seen by as many people as possible. I intend to do everything I can to > make sure that is the case. > > I am passionate about "the Passion." You will be as well. Don't miss it. > And, I would like to add these thoughts. This film is going to receive=3D20 > more scrutiny and be the focus of more public debate than any film EVER. > > The argument that this film is anti-Semitic will be played 1000's of > time a day in every household across America... across the world. To > me...a most crucial "discovery" of this man's "experience" is the > reality that "my sins killed Jesus." The full weight of this truth is > enormous! What an opportunity for millions and millions of people to > "discover" this through the film. So... I encourage you to think > carefully about how you're going to respond to the "debate" because > there will be one. It's a great opportunity to witness about what it > means to be a Christian... and nowhere is it appropriate or biblical to > point a finger at the Jewish race. To do so is to stand squarely in His > face and say... "You died for nothing!" > > Please pass this along to your Christian friends and family... to those=3D20 > that will truly understand the message... so that they can be prepared > to respond in such a way that bears a positive witness to Jesus' death > and resurrection. > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] The AML Conference Date: 14 Nov 2003 08:28:12 -0700 Alan Mitchell writes:=20 >Thanks to the AML conference and Jon Enos's class, I just finished my >movie script today. 96 pages. Can you tell us anything at all about the script at this point? Does it follow one of your plays? (Alan did place in the Villa Playhouse Playwriting Contest this last year.) Cheers! Just coming out with a full 96 pages of work is an achievement! Yea!=20 Marilyn Brown ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:10 AM > Thanks to the AML conference and Jon Enos's class, I just finished my > movie script today. 96 pages. Yes, it probably needs editing. Yes, I had > the idea and notes for it before. (And yes, it is media that avoids > description and has a hard time telling what people think or true > spirituality.) However, it can tell what they want. > > Now I need Jon Giorgi to tell me how to proceed. > > Alan Mitchell > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] SCOTT ANDERSON, _The Best Two Years_ Date: 14 Nov 2003 08:25:47 -0700 >_Michael Martindale: Best Two Years_ falls squarely into third place, >edging _Out of Step_ into fourth. Dutcher still reigns supreme, but the >list of worthy lords surrounding the king is finally growing after a >long period of stagnation. I very much appreciated Michael's intelligent assessment of this film. I agree with him whole-heartedly. I was impressed with the film in the same ways Michael states here, and I am going to drag my husband to it (who has resisted going to all these other LDS films--I won't be sorry about this one!). Happy day. Marilyn Brown ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 5:16 PM > THE BEST TWO YEARS > A film directed by Scott S. Anderson > Produced by Michael Flynn > Screenplay by Scott S. Anderson > To be released February 2004 by Harvest Films > Distributed by Halestorm Entertainment > > > "Quality Fluff" > > Richard Dutcher (why is it so hard to avoid mentioning his name when=3D20 > discussing an LDS film, even one he had nothing to do with?) = didn't=3D20 > create the new genre of LDS film--he blew it away. His first two films,=3D20 > _God's Army_ and _Brigham City_, established a nonexistent film genre=3D20 > and set the bar for quality right from the beginning. It's been = all=3D20 > downhill ever since. > > To date, as an LDS film critic, my list of quality LDS films has been=3D20 > very short: _Brigham City_ is the best, followed by _God's Army_, and=3D20 > the barely noticed _Out of Step_ a distant third. _Charly_ was a=3D20 > borderline movie, and all the others (that I've seen so far) fall under=3D20 > that borderline of quality. I despaired of ever seeing another film that > > could be added to the quality side of that list until Zion Films=3D20 > released the next Dutcher movie. > > But at the recent Association for Mormon Letters' fifth annual writers=3D20 > conference, I had an opportunity to view a pre-release screening of the=3D20 > film _The Best Two Years_. It's with no small sense of satisfaction that > > I'm able to add a fourth LDS film to the list of worthy additions to the > > genre. > > _Best Two Years_ falls squarely into third place, edging _Out of Step_=3D20 > into fourth. Dutcher still reigns supreme, but the list of worthy lords=3D20 > surrounding the king is finally growing after a long period of > stagnation. > > What makes _Best Two Years_ a bronze medalist instead of silver or gold=3D20 > is the fact that it's pure fluff. The plot is anorexically slim; the=3D20 > climax as predictable as a Scooby-doo episode. But that doesn't harm the > > film, because that's all the film was ever intended to be. As fluff, it=3D20 > succeeds admirably. As some lightweight, pleasant entertainment for an=3D20 > LDS audience, it scores in all the required categories. > > _Best Two Years_ chronicles the day-to-day experiences of a district of=3D20 > LDS missionaries stationed in the Netherlands. We join them as = the=3D20 > obligatory new greenie shows up, communicating in a language that none=3D20 > of the railroad station officials can identify. The other missionaries=3D20 > are familiar characters, including the one who has lost his zeal for the > > work, and maybe his testimony as well. > > The screenplay gets the job done, the acting serves the screenplay well, > > and the technical results are of adequate quality. Nothing overly=3D20 > glowing here, but a competent effort that delivers. > > The plot exists to support the laughs, which come at a regular=3D20 > frequency. It's not the slapstick bellylaughs of _It's a Mad, Mad, Mad,=3D20 > Mad World_ (although some of the comedy does edge precariously close to=3D20 > over-the-top), but the sort of comedy that arises out of the characters=3D20 > and the situations they find themselves in. The serious moments = are=3D20 > gentle and effective--and thankfully sparse, because, after all, this=3D20 > _is_ fluff. No attempt was made to justify this lighthearted piece of=3D20 > entertainment with A Message so the filmmakers could be sure = their=3D20 > efforts were Building the Kingdom. > > And in the process, they _did_ build the kingdom. They created a film=3D20 > that told a Mormon story with real (slightly exaggerated) Mormon=3D20 > characters full of the sort of foibles one would expect from = human=3D20 > beings, even human beings engaged in the Lord's work. But never is the=3D20 > dignity of the work itself compromised. It's just the sort of thing the=3D20 > art of the Kingdom needs right now to crawl its way out of the=3D20 > club-over-the-head approach to uplifting entertainment. > > Scott Anderson, the writer/director, adapted this film from a stage play > > he'd written some time ago. Perhaps that seasoned heritage is why the=3D20 > film works so well. Halestorm is the company Anderson chose to=3D20 > distribute the film. It's the first film Halestorm will be distributing=3D20 > that it didn't produce itself. > > This film may be the film that puts Halestorm on the map as a=3D20 > respectable contender in the LDS film industry. Until now, all they've=3D20 > distributed are their own forgettable comedies, which made many Mormons=3D20 > laugh for a moment, but are poorly designed to withstand the judgment of > > time. _Best Two Years_ has the quality to withstand. If its foundation=3D20 > isn't quite rock, at least it's concrete, and will weather the storm of=3D20 > criticism much better than the sandy foundations of _Singles Ward_ and=3D20 > _The R.M._ The irony is not lost on me that the film that could make=3D20 > Halestorm respectable is a film they didn't produce. > > But I give them credit for recognizing a film that is quality when it=3D20 > came their way. _Best Two Years_ fits right into their modus=3D20 > operandi--lighthearted comedic fluff--but does so at a level of quality=3D20 > that is to be applauded--and seen. > > --=3D20 > D. Michael Martindale > dmichael@wwno.com > > =3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D= 3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D =3D3D=3D > =3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D > Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at > http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths > > Sponsored by Worlds Without Number > http://www.wwno.com > =3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D= 3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D =3D3D=3D > =3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronn! Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] The Sugar Beet paper edition (SLT) Date: 13 Nov 2003 17:24:04 -0600 At 07:24 PM 11/10/03 -0700, Alan Rex Mitchell wrote: >Arithmetic check. > >Subject: [AML] The Sugar Beet paper edition (SLT) > > > > November 10, 2003 > > "There's only one thing you can do if you live in Utah: You can > > be funny or you can be a nerd," Petersen says. "We're funny > > nerds." > >To which I say: Todd Petersen, Chris Bigalow, and I are two of a kind. > >Alan Mitchell There are three types of people in this world: those who flame others for making mathematical mistakes in posts, and those who do not. (_My_ excuse for not being able to count? I have a masters degree in math . . . ) -- Ronn! :) Ronn Blankenship Instructor of Astronomy/Planetary Science University of Montevallo Montevallo, AL -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Women in LDS Film, Not Pretty Enough: Part Three Date: 16 Oct 2003 19:46:52 -0600 [moderator's note: Let's keep the drool factor fairly low... :)] Jongiorgi Enos wrote: > Tayva Patch is probably the most attractive >mother of fully grown kids around. > Let's tell the whole truth. She's a grandmother, believe it or not. >(Like how I tried to delicately >side-step the age issue?!) I'd do a love scene with her no problem. > I have. Neener, neener, neener. Thom -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] The envious critic (was Harry Potter) Date: 27 Oct 2003 19:48:11 -0700 <020e01c39be3$6f34ab30$0b00a8c0@brigisheim> In-Reply-To: <020e01c39be3$6f34ab30$0b00a8c0@brigisheim> Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list Scott Parkin wrote: >think both Brother Samuelson and Brother Dutcher >went over the line with their criticism of _The Singles Ward > Unless we ultimately adopt the idea that art has no inherent rules, then I don't see how we can claim that criticism of art is unwarranted. (If=20 you not saying that, please forgive me.) We are told, after all, to seek after the "best books" and, by extension, the best of all other forms of art? How do we determine what is the best? Is it only what we "like"=20 that is the best? Is modern art "bad" because we don't like it? Maybe=20 we just love those dogs playing poker. Does that alone make it good art? There are rules to art. To an outsider, the plays of Shakespeare and=20 Ionesco may appear to be two completely different forms of art, with=20 nothing in common. But to the theatre student, who is taught to look=20 behind the text, the staging, the two genres are much more alike then=20 they are different. And any good novelist will tell you that a plot is=20 much more than one event after another. The best novelists make it seem=20 as though their stories flow seamlessly from chapter to chapter, but a=20 lot of behind the scenes work has been done to make it appear so. Because of this, some less skilled people produce what THEY THINK is art but which breaks the rules inherent to that art. They either don't know=20 the rules, or they are too close to the project to see where they've=20 gone wrong. And what they end up producing is something that resembles=20 art but is not. I do not believe that we should let the rule non-users (notice I'm not=20 saying rule breakers, because intelligent breaking of the rules is also=20 art) get away with their indolence for the sake of unity, or politeness. They need to be told, as forcefully as possible, by those who know the=20 rules, where they've gone wrong, why, and how to make their next work=20 better. Empathy alone, agreement with subject matter, are not enough to=20 require our positive opinions. We don't have to be rude, or insulting, but we do have to be truthful, if we take it upon ourselves to be the=20 arbiters of the rules. And sometimes the truth hurts. Eric Samuelsen is an AML treasure. He knows more about theatre and films and how to do them then any other practicing playwright. Ditto Richard=20 Dutcher vis a vis films. Any word from these stellar gentlemen, no=20 matter how harsh it may appear, is to be sought after. If they say=20 something is amiss in a certain film or play, it is not because they are envious; it is because they know the rules and their word can be=20 trusted. (And I say that as a recipient of Eric's criticism of several=20 of my works, where he was so clear, and his arguments for change so=20 unassailable in their logic that I was forced to re-work my scripts even though I had been utterly convinced that they were flawless.) When criticizing the work of our fellow Saints, we do them no good to=20 hold back the truth for fear of offending. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] TOPPING, _Utah Historians . . ._ (SLT) Date: 16 Nov 2003 14:29:44 +0000 SUNDAY November 16, 2003 The West Under Cover: History's Salvation By Martin Naparsteck Special to The Tribune Utah Historians and the Reconstruction of Western History By Gary Topping University of Oklahoma Press; $34.95 Five Utah writers transformed the way history is written in the West. and Gary Topping convincingly shows us how they accomplished that. The essentials of his argument are these: that until those five writers came along (Bernard DeVoto, Juanita Brooks, Fawn Brodie, Wallace Stegner, Dale Morgan), Utah history was an embarrassing collection of poorly constructed lean-tos, designed to prop up Mormon mythology. But while each of the writers had limitations in the practice of history, the histories they wrote were stronger than the limitations. The argument that Utah history was little more than Mormon propaganda ("heavy-handed pro-Mormon interpretations," Topping writes), and that all five displayed courage by defying the pressures of a church-created culture, is not new. Levi Peterson in his 1988 biography of Brooks, and Newell Bringhurst in his 1999 biography of Brodie, for example, offered similar arguments. Topping acknowledges those two biographies as sources for much of the information he presents on those two writers. That Mormon culture can stifle creativity is also not a new charge. For example, Scott Chisholm in a 1996 article in Western Humanities Review argued that Mormon culture limits literary creativity. What is new in Topping's Utah Historians and the Reconstruction of Western History is the cumulative analysis of the five historians, presenting a detailed portrait of how history in Utah was transformed. A more accurate and less awkward title for his book would have been The Salvation of Utah History. His title and much of his prose ring with the thud of an aluminum (read academic) bell. (Sample: "[Robert Joseph] Dwyer was the first Utah historian to maintain a consistent critical objectivity toward his materials. The polemical element, either for or against Mormonism, which had vitiated most of the literature of Mormon and Utah history before his time, is completely absent from his book." The stuff is readable, but as graceful as a mule plodding through mud.) His most interesting thesis involves Brooks, who, in writing The Mountain Meadows Massacre, provided the first book-length examination of the Mormons' role in the 1857 murder of more than 100 men, women, and children on a wagon train in southwestern Utah. The church had long engaged in a cover-up of church members' involvement by blaming Paiutes for the killings. Almost universally, Brooks has been admired for the courage she showed in writing the truth. She was a devout church member and feared excommunication. Topping shares the admiration but suggests that fear "kept her from following her materials to what many would regard as their most convincing interpretation." He writes, "Brooks was reluctant whenever she felt obligated to dissent from official church points of view." It was, in effect, a fear of being disloyal, he argues, that kept her from accusing Brigham Young "even as an accessory after the fact." His argument against Stegner and DeVoto is largely that, as fiction writers, they used literary devices that professional historians would find unacceptable. For example, in critiquing DeVoto's novel The Year of Decision 1846, he lists, among other common criticisms, "Most offensively, he seemed to be suggesting that only one year, 1846, explained a whole century of western history." Topping refers to Stegner's defense of his friend's novel: "Stegner knew [the literary device DeVoto used] by the formal term synecdoche, a figure of speech in which a part (in this case, the year 1846) is made to stand for the whole (nineteenth-century western expansion)." Topping believes Brodie, an early practitioner of psychobiography, sometimes used bad psychological methods in her biographies, including those of Thomas Jefferson and Richard Nixon. However, he largely exempts from that charge her first and most influential biography, No Man Knows My History, an unflattering portrait of Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church. Morgan seems an odd inclusion in this group of important historians. In his writing, he was the most academic of the group and was perhaps the most uniformly admired within the history profession. But he never generated the animosity that often greeted the writings of the other four, and certainly he is the least known. But Topping admires the thoroughness and accuracy of his research. His big limitation, Topping writes, was in thinking facts are enough, resulting in a failure "to consider the larger meanings of his factual syntheses." The wrong title and some awkward writing are minor faults in a fine and intellectually intriguing book. With the possible exclusion of Morgan, this book is really about how courage improves the writing of history. ----- Martin Naparsteck reviews books from and about the West for The Salt Lake Tribune. Copyright 2003, The Salt Lake Tribune.=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Negative Themes and Artistic Value Date: 16 Oct 2003 19:51:41 -0600 Susan Malmrose wrote: >>I can think of lots of pop culture which DEPICT adultery or murder. I >>can think of plenty of films which show enough skin that those who >>watch them might be TEMPTED to commit adultery. But I can't think of >>a single one which glamorize murder or adultery. >> >>Specifics, anyone? >> >>Eric Samuelsen >> =20 >> > >It's been so long since I've watched anything that even graphically >depicts it, I couldn't tell you. > >Providing you don't consider premarital sex adultery. > >And I'd probably argue that graphically depicting it *is* glamorizing >it. (In the way that Tarantino does.) > > =20 > I believe Tarantino does exactly the opposite. He doesn't glamorize=20 violence, for instance, as much he draws you into so much so that he=20 sickens you with it, not inuring you to it but showing you that it isn't as glamorous as the action movies make it look, but very messy and very=20 disgusting. Thom Duncan -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathrynlane@cs.com Subject: [AML] Re: Speech Patterns - was Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 14 Nov 2003 17:51:08 -0500 I think there are Utah Mormon speech patterns. Not everyone, but quite a few, folks in Utah sound like the conference speakers. I have come to associate that cadence with well to do Salt Lake dwellers, LDS or not. Definitly a "type". My Idaho relatives are very LDS but don't speak that way at all. We do have a kind of "Mormon Speak" in which we use certain phrases but that isn't universal. Here in the south we have our own little mix of Mormon and Southern. My Bishop and our former Stake President in Little Rock have speach patterns that are more like Bill Clinton's. They sound like Baptist Preachers, which my Bishop and former Stake President were in former lives. You haven't lived until you hear the Sacrament prayer in deep bayou tones by a real Cajun. =20 "Jamie Laulusa" wrote: > >Eric Samuelsen: >>The writing >>led him that direction, of course, but still, I didn't hear Mitchell's >>former connections to Mormon culture in his speech patterns, in the >>falling inflections and the word emphases peculiar to our = culture.=3D20 > >There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? =A0What are they? > >~Jamie Laulusa > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Negative Themes and Artistic Value Date: 17 Nov 2003 16:22:31 -0700 ___ Thom ___ | I believe Tarantino does exactly the opposite. He doesn't=20 | glamorize violence, for instance, as much he draws you into=20 | so much so that he sickens you with it, not inuring you | to it but showing you that it isn't as glamorous as the=20 | action movies make it look, but very messy and very=20 | disgusting. ___ Certainly Tarantino's films are more complex than many realize. However to say he doesn't glamorize violence seems incorrect. He shows consequences and humanity. But that doesn't mean he also doesn't glamorize the violence. =20 Consider _Kill Bill_. Admittedly part 2 isn't out yet where the consequences are shown. But while the plot clearly seems to be leading to "The Bride" realizing the problems of revenge, the film also clearly glamorizes violence. Indeed the film is primarily a comedy focusing in on various film genres from the 70's. The decapitations and dismemberments are done with the "wink wink nudge nudge" that we saw in _Monty Python and the Holy Grail_. Indeed one scene is an homage to that black knight in that film. To say that the intent was to "sicken you with it" seems rather difficult to assert. Indeed that Japanese edit of the film has the switch to black and white in the sword fighting left out. It is far more glamorous but the intent is not to sicken but a kind of geek chic where one glorifies in the B-movies of the 70's. It is a very referential film. Intentionally so. And the focus is what is cool. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Speech Patterns -=20 Date: 17 Nov 2003 17:09:11 -0700 At 05:51 PM 11/14/03 -0500, you wrote: >I think there are Utah Mormon speech patterns. Not everyone, but quite >a few, folks in Utah sound like the conference speakers. There's also a specific cadence to scripture reading. The voice goes along in a monotone until the final syllable of a passage, when it drops down a couple of tones. Then it starts over. barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Clark L Draney Subject: Re: [AML] Review: Pride and Prejudice, a Latter-day Comedy Date: 17 Nov 2003 16:00:58 -0700 My wife and I also saw _Pride and Prejudice_ last week. I have been stewing all weekend about what kind of review to write and whether I could even one write one that would be helpful to list members and others who might like to know about this film before seeing. Luckily, Eric Samuelsen saved the day and wrote the review that a more savvy, articulate me might have written. I agree with almost everything he said. The wedding chapel scene is atrocious, really. I also noticed that the=20 focus puller must have had a couple of sick days during production because there were more than a few scenes in which even my relatively poor eyesight told me that something was amiss. Nevertheless, this was a very good effort. A smart script with some good ideas. Light on the in jokes, but staying pretty true to Utah Mormonism. Solid acting from nearly everyone. Let's have more like this, and less like _The R.M._ (which I turned off after about 10 minutes-- does it get better and I just didn't endure to the end?). Clark D.=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "BJ Rowley" Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 17 Nov 2003 14:59:55 -0800 > On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, at 10:16 AM, Eugene Woodbury wrote: > >>>Who else has a webpage? Mine is: www.bjrowley.com Is there going to be a list or "living room" available again where we can see all these? -BJ Rowley -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darvell Hunt Subject: [AML] RE: Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 18 Nov 2003 00:20:30 GMT For those who wonder if the details of the made-for-tv movie were accurate or not, I suggest one thing: Read "Bringing Elizabeth Home," which was "written" by Elizabeth's parents. ("Written" in quotes because I think it was ghostwritten.) I audioread the book over one weekend and I must admit it was touching. And probably more accurate concerning the facts than any other source, although I did find a few things in it obviously slanted to the Smart's point of view. Some of the details in this book are different from what was commonly known and was frequently reported by the news media. If you want to know the closest thing to the truth, go to the source. BTW, I think, from what I recall in the movie and the book by the Smarts, that Elizabeth's quote in the movie was correct. Something like, "Thou saith, I saith." Anyway, for what it was meant to be, I give "Bringing Elizabeth Home" a high recommendation, especially to those who saw the movie and want to know more. In many cases, the "truth" was abbreviated because of time constraints. For example, the final scene at the police station didn't really happen. It was a collage of many different scenes combined into one. Ed Smart first saw his daughter at the police station in Sandy. Lois Smart didn't see her until she was in Salt Lake City. Lois didn't get the call that she had been found until after Ed had seen her in Sandy. (In the movie, the Lois's phone rang just as Ed slammed the door to leave.) And there were lots more police around "during that scene" and they didn't just leave when they met with her. The police "debriefed" her, the parents got upset, Tom Walsh called and told them they shouldn't be harassing their daughter, and on and on. That five-minute scene represents probably about eight to ten hours in reality. But you couldn't show that in a two-hour TV show. Get the book and read it (or listen to it, like I did). It will satisfy your curiosity about "the truth." Darvell -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 17 Nov 2003 17:07:39 -0700 > On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, at 10:16 AM, Eugene Woodbury wrote: > > >> Who else has a webpage? > >> Susan Malmrose > I do! 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Re: My Web Page Date: 17 Nov 2003 15:06:30 -0700 I've got one, too, www.annettelyon.com. Nothing too fancy, but I've had fun with it. I send out a (roughly) quarterly newsletter with updates, LDS arts information, and often a fun poll or contest with things like a free LDS novel or book store gift certificate as a prize. For anyone who likes word games, I've got one on my site right now. It's something I've done w/ family for years, and it's deliciously addictive. There's also the results of my (hopelessly unscientific) Mormon Arts poll (click on "current contest" and find the link to the results from there). On a different note--and I am probably the last person to clue in on this one--but just today I realized that the recurring Oprah guest and O magazine columnist Martha Beck, and the one who is Nibley's daughter and author of "Expecting Adam," are one and the same. Never put that together before. The discovery surprised me for some reason. I had to reread the review on in the archive. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] BENNETT, "Flippin', Oh My Heck and Dang" (DN) Date: 16 Nov 2003 14:33:47 +0000 Sunday, November 16, 2003 3 new works to debut By Ivan M. Lincoln Deseret Morning News "FLIPPIN', OH MY HECK AND DANG: A UTAH MUSICAL COMEDY REVUE," based on songwriter/playwright Alex Bennett's experiences in moving from New Jersey to Utah 10 years ago, will be presented Friday and Saturday at 7:30 p.m. in the historic Murray Theater, 4961 S. State. Bennett notes that while it touches on some humorous aspects of religion in Utah, the show "respects all feelings and beliefs and is respectful toward the LDS religion." Over the past few years, he's written several songs about his Utah experience, which has included meeting a local LDS woman "who figured if they were going to be married, it would be better if he became a Mormon." He later realized that the 15 songs could be put together in one cohesive story. The tunes include the title song plus "Salt Lake City Blues," "I'm a Western Guy," "Up in Millcreek Canyon," "Antelope Island," "When All My Dreams Come True." In addition to Bennett, the cast includes Jessica Gogan, Kiki Stafford and Darcy Cole as the Dangettes, Troy Gogan, Ron Coston and Stewart Bates (the latter recalls childhood memories of walking to the historic Murray Theater to watch movies on weekends). Tickets are $7 at the door. For further information, call 575-1933.=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sugar Beet Subject: [AML] Sugar Beet FAQ Date: 17 Nov 2003 09:04:25 -0800 If you're interested, following are some answers to frequently asked questions about the Sugar Beet and our print edition:=20 WHY ARE YOU CHANGING TO A PRINT FORMAT? Reason number one: We've run out of webmastering resources and gumption, so we can no longer publish the site as often or as well as in the past. Meanwhile, our staff harbors some untapped print expertise and enthusiasm, so it seemed like a good time to change format. Besides, we've long desired to heft and fondle the physical fruits of our labors. Paper cuts be damned! Reason number two: We're experimenting to see if there's a paying market for our brand of alternative Mormon entertainment. If so, we have some cool book projects planned for you. We are working on a Sugar Beet Guide to Mormonism that will revolutionize your member-missionary efforts. We're planning parodies of some overripe Mormon books and periodicals. We're aware of some provocative, groundbreaking novel and memoir manuscripts that we'd love to acquire and publish for you. We're planning a Best of the Sugar Beet book with highlights from our first 25 online issues. Of course, none of these things will happen unless we see proof that we have enough flesh-and-blood customers, as opposed to our 11,000+ virtual freeloaders. So, if you haven't already, send in your Sugar Beet subscription today! ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE MONEY? Hah. Let us repeat: Hah. If we were ever fortunate enough to generate a surplus, we would fold it back into enhancing and promoting the Sugar Beet magazine and getting our book publishing plans going. It would be great to pay a pittance to our writers, graphic artists, and editors, but no one is quitting their day job. WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF THE WEBSITE?=20 From now on, our website at TheSugarBeet.com will be mainly a portal for the print edition. We will regularly post previews and teasers for material appearing in our printed issues, with the goal of attracting subscribers. We may also use the website to publish news reports that we want to release immediately because of their timeliness. WILL YOU TELL ME MORE ABOUT THE MAGAZINE?=20 We'll do the biggest, highest-quality magazine that our resources allow. Obviously, the more subscribers and advertisers we get, the more we'll be able to increase page count and production quality. At a minimum, we're planning for issues to be 16-20 full-sized pages, with as much or more material than our online issues typically contained. All your favorite columnists will appear regularly, as well as some new features. We'll include more material generated by our readers, including letters to the editor. WHAT IF I SUBSCRIBE AND THEN DON'T FEEL SATISFIED WITH THE MAGAZINE?=20 We will honor requests for prorated refunds on remaining issues. However, we'll also send a noogie your way via the Force. CAN I SEE A SAMPLE ISSUE BEFORE I SUBSCRIBE? At this time, we are looking for charter subscribers. We will offer single copies for sale after our print edition is reasonably well established. WILL I BE ABLE TO BUY THE SUGAR BEET AT STORES?=20 We hope some retailers who carry magazines in heavily Mormon areas will be interested in stocking the Sugar Beet. If you have any contacts who could help with this, please e-mail us at thesugarbeet2@cs.com.=20 HOW COME THERE'S NEVER BEEN A SUGAR BEET T-SHIRT? We're working on that.=20 HOW CAN I WRITE FOR THE SUGAR BEET OR AT LEAST SHARE MY IDEAS? We welcome articles, news tips, suggestions, complaints, and other feedback from readers. Simply send them to thesugarbeet2@cs.com or The Sugar Beet, PO Box 1086, Orem, UT 84059.=20 ARE YOU GUYS ACTIVE MORMONS? No, we are Jehovah's Witnesses. Just kidding. Everybody on the staff is a Mormon, and the majority are active. HOW DO I SUBSCRIBE? Use our PayPal link at TheSugarBeet.com, or send a check for $19.95 to The Sugar Beet, PO Box 1086, Orem, UT 84059.=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: [AML] Options for our conferences Date: 17 Nov 2003 12:51:47 -0700 I think we had a very good turnout for our writers conference, and we're anticipating another good meeting in a few months with our Annual Meeting. However, we know there are many AML-list subscribers who live too far away to attend our functions. We would like to know if any of you would be interested, in the future, in purchasing some kind of recording of the conferences--either cassette, CD, or DVD. Right now this is just a very nebulous idea, so don't dive for your checkbooks yet. But if you're interested, please let us know what would be most useful. Writers conference or Annual Meeting (or both)? Highlights or every session? Which media format is best? Thanks, Melissa Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Sam Brown Subject: [AML] kudos to sugar beet Date: 17 Nov 2003 17:59:37 -0700 Hello, Just had to go on the record as saying Sugar Beet is a wonderful addition to Mormon, even American, satire, and I wish the entire crew (should I say "Krue" to scandalize, or leave it as is?) the best of luck as they try to find their way in the rivers of direct mail advertising circulating through our postal service. To indulge in a positive cliche, keep up the good work. -- Yours, Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital sam@vecna.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Review: Pride and Prejudice, a Latter-day Comedy Date: 17 Nov 2003 19:33:39 -0700 I took my two daughters and a friend to a screening of Pride and Prejudice on Saturday. I sat next to a 60+ year old woman I'd never seen before who spent ten minutes telling me how much she LOVED the RM and SINGLES WARD and how she hoped "this will be just as good". I bit my tongue and smiled and said, "yes, I've seen them", "oh they DO spoof Mormons , don't they"...and then trying not to cringe when she told me she'd read PRIDE AND PREJUDICE and "just didn't get it" but hoped this movie would help her get it better. I didn't ask her at the end if she understood Austen's work now. I had to do some arm twisting to get my daughters interested in going. They are avowed Austenophiles. Not only have they read all the books several times over, but own every film version of any of the books ever made, no matter how obscure. My 24 year old said, "Why mess with perfection?" Long story short, they both loved it. Yes, they agreed, the geek in the bad wig in the Vegas wedding chapel was stupid and detracted from the show. But, unlike Eric, they very much enjoyed Darcy running handcuffed down the road...probably because of the punch line Kitty got to "deliver" to the scene. In fact, Kitty was their favorite character, followed closely by Lydia. They both felt the screenplay truthfully interpreted the vacuousness of those two.=20 On the flip side of the Bad Actor in a Small Role coin was one of their favorite characters, the bookstore owner, all the more memorable for his short screen time and the fact he didn't utter one line. Their assessment was it wasn't so much a retelling (as was CLUELESS) but more a flavoring that was true to Austen's satirical vision of the culture of her day. Boy, did they nail the marriage-minded culture of Happy Valley.=20 My girls LOVED the Pink Bible and are anxious to know if they can purchase a full copy of it. And a T-shirt, ala the ones given away at the screening. I smell Marketing Opportunities for this film. The first Mo-film to spawn a line of accessories. We all thought Carmen Rasmussen as Charlotte was an oddity that detracted. She was great as the spotlighted window dressing to the party scene--her music was great--but to give her a scene? And it led us to "Eeewwwee..." thinking for a bit that she was destined to end up with Collins. Gross. (Collins' eventual mate [trying not to give too much away here] was a delight and something that even improved upon Austen's fate for one of the characters. There you have it--introducing Charlotte for a brief scene was a negative mark. Speaking of negative marks, from Eric's assessment, what my girls loved about the questionable binging scene is that Elizabeth and Jane dragged to the store looking and smelling bad. As overblown as it was, I don't agree it was the Death Wish Eric felt it to be. But then I'm no film expert, just a Chick Flickaholic. It set up the best line in the show, as delivered by Lydia, and was a satisfying conclusion to the Pink Bible tease about "How to Grocery Shop". My girls related to it, and felt the satire was strengthened by the outrageous portrayal that two women could lay around in the same underwear for a week. It carried the same flavor as the moments when we are in Elizabeth's imagination...and then are mildly disappointed when it turns out not to be reality. (I have SO wanted to behave JUST that way in some Sacrament Meetings...oh, you'll just have to see the movie...) The girls had a lengthy conversation on the way home about how many of the characters seemed to be cast for their physical resemblance to more "famous" actors: Kam Heskins is reminiscent of Julia Stiles. Orlando Seale reminds one of Collin Firth. Ben Gourley as Charles Bingley looks and SOUNDS like Owen Wilson, but is a heck of a lot cuter. My Austen Experts declared that Charles was played too much of a goof, and felt this could be chalked up to the writers trying to capture his boyish innocence. Another negative mark both my daughters commented on--the character of Caroline Bingley came off as a total b#@*% (can I say that on this list?). There was nothing of the subtle elegant word games and animosity veiled by polite manners at which the Caroline of Austen's creation excelled. Probably because this Caroline served as nothing more than a plot device. Oh well. Limitations of 90 minute film. All in all, we loved it and will pay to see it again on opening weekend, December 5th, taking all of our girlfriends with us. In fact, we've already got a Chick Movie Night planned. We're going in our pajamas. The website is a lot of fun too. This one is a winner. http://prideprejudice.com We can't wait to add it to our Austen Collection, on DVD, of course. Next Christmas. Kim Madsen -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Date: 17 Nov 2003 19:45:47 -0700 Well, that was one full theater. Melissa and I also saw the previewing last week. We enjoyed it immensely, Melissa more than I. I'm thinking, based on all of three data points, that there's a pretty strong correlation between love of the book and love of the movie. For the record, I love Clueless, so perhaps there's something to Eric Samuelsen's metric. There is a lot of in-joke material from Austen's Pride and Prejudice from the name of their street being Longbourn and the appearance of Rosings. The characters are well-translated and well acted in ways faithful to the book while being flexible enough to allow us to join them in their new setting. Unlike Eric, I had no trouble with the ice-cream binge scene. I think Eric misreads the cause of Elizabeth's dejection--it isn't the romantic dejection she is reacting to--it is the heart-rending description of her book--such a harsh evaluation (should sound familiar to any published or hopeful author). The Darcy-as-publisher scene is a *wonderful* adaptation of the scene at Rosings where Darcy applies for Elizabeth's hand in terms that he feels *should* be flattering, but which act so forcefully in the opposite direction. I thought the biggest weakness of the film was Darcy, though. I've tried for the last couple of days to figure out why I was so, well, blahhed by this character. I don't *think* it is the acting. I get the feeling that the actor playing Darcy is talented enough. I suspect it is a combination of Direction and Writing. Darcy isn't *near* biting enough to live up to his role in the film. He get's a *single* dismissive comment and spends the rest of the film grinning goofily. In the novel, Darcy is a strong character who goes from haughty to humble, but retains his central strength merely redirected. I didn't get this sense of purpose, conviction or strength from this Darcy. Still, I'd better be careful not to give the wrong impression--I really am trying to describe a vague unease and I'm not at all sure I've accurately tracked back the source of my unease. It was a little off--I think because of sub-optimal writing and/or direction. I was *thrilled* with the Jane/Bingley romance. I was *very* skeptical from the posters depicting an exotic Jane with such distinctive (almost out-of-place/singular) looks. One of the film's great triumphs, I think, is how it made these attributes assets to the story without overwhelming it. Jane and Bingley are just so dang *fun*. Bingley is extremely well portrayed and the image of him running across Las Vegas in his jewel-blue T-shirt and determined grin has become a permanent member of my internal landscape (I hope it's permanent--I can't help but grin each time I recall it). From the time Bingley dances with Jane through the final denouement these characters never failed to please. Anyway, I heartily enjoyed the movie and hope it becomes a smashing success. I'm ever more hopeful for LDS cinema. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] Women in LDS Film, Not Pretty Enough: Part Three Date: 18 Nov 2003 21:56:13 -0700 >>(Like how I tried to delicately >>side-step the age issue?!) I'd do a love scene with her no problem. > >I have. Neener, neener, neener. And Tayva Patch has pulled my hair. Granted, it was a wig when she was the Baker's Wife and I was Rapunzel, but still. It's my meager claim to fame. :) Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chantaclair" Subject: [AML] Re: aml-list-digest V2 #222 RE: Passion of Christ Date: 18 Nov 2003 20:26:34 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time) Have I told you folks lately that I think you are amazing? Every time I feel I don't have 'time' to read, I glance through and get caught up wishing I would take more time. Anyway. . . I do have a website if anyone is interesting in meandering. http://Chantaclair.com But this: "In fact I sometimes smile when I hear someone say, *Christ died for us.* Theoretically this is true, but the real message is, He laid aside his mortality and then was resurrected to take on immortality for us and that Christ lives for us. Regards, Bill Willson, writer"=20 Was really what I wanted to comment on and give kudos for. I am looking forward to Gibson's rendering. I suppose I look forward to anything done with real personal passion. I thought you said this wonderfully Bill. Thanks for all of your inspiration, wisdom, questions, and humanity Aml folks.=20 Marsha Steed. - Still discovering who I am. -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 19 Nov 2003 09:07:35 -0700 I have a web page, but it has nothing about me on it. It is a bibliography of speculative fiction written by and about Mormons (novels, short stories, poetry, and nonfiction). If anyone knows of something I've missed, please let me know! Marny Parking www.MormonSF.org -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] GUNN, "Smart Single Guys" (BYU Newsnet) Date: 19 Nov 2003 15:21:07 +0000 Theater Viewpoint: Single student shenanigans have ups and downs in 'Smart Single Guys' By Elizabeth Bennett NewsNet Senior Reporter 18 Nov 2003 "Smart Single Guys" manages an interesting equilibrium: for every cliched and useless scene in the show, there is a scene that is interesting and even hilarious. The award-winning script focuses on misadventures (or, more accurately, lack of adventures) in the dating lives of several single BYU guys. They all seem to have girl trouble - one boy only goes on blind dates, one boy can't get up the courage to ask out the girl of his dreams, one boy is dating a girl he doesn't really like, one boy ... well, you get the idea. They live together, argue together, steal each other's food, give misguided girl advice, and generally act as BYU male students act - except all these shenanigans are complimented by song, dance and even film. "Smart Single Guys" has a lot going for it. Playwright Tony Gunn, while a little uneven, has a fresh take on the BYU dating scene. Guys will recognize themselves and girls will recognize their friends. Of course, as the show demonstrates, you don't always want to spend an evening watching your guy friends sit around because, let's face it, they're boring. The show carries a lot of dead weight around and the first act alone is at least ten minutes too long. It lacks focus and the kind of precise writing that marks good theater. On the plus side, the cast is wonderful. The boys are so natural it's easy to suspect that they're playing themselves. Hilary Akin has a hilarious turn as Lily, the telemarketer, Michael Padekin and Forrest Foster stand out as Drew and Kelly, respectively. The real scene- stealer, however, is Jed Hirschel Wells, whose jaunt as the sarcastic, deadpan Beck is both hilarious and endearing. The trio Robot Ghost is a great complement to the script. It highlights everything that is good, as well as providing quality entertainment before and after the show. In the end, "Smart Single Guys" is similar to "Monty Python and the Holy Grail." Wade through all the slow parts, and there are some real gems that stick with you. 'Smart Single Guys' rings true with single students By Sunny Layne NewsNet Staff Writer - 18 Nov 2003 The cast of 'Smart Single Guys' do what single guys do best: sit around and talk about the opposite sex.At the ripe old age of 25, BYU senior Tony Gunn has directed seven professional plays and written numerous theatrical scripts. "He is one of those guys that gets it done," said BYU senior Jed Wells. "He is the motor." His comedy, "Smart Single Guys," debuted November 5 and has sold out every performance since. The play has proven so successful, that BYU's Theatre Department added one whole week to the show's run. The last performance is now Dec. 6. "It is really gratifying and flattering," Gunn said. "I felt a really positive crowd reaction during the performances. We have a great cast and director, and this obviously is a good reflection on them, as well as the writing." Box Office employees said adding a week of shows is rare. "It doesn't happen very often," said HFAC Box Office supervisor Chrissie Sant. "It takes a show that will sell out frequently in order to provide more performances to the public." Regarding finances, Gunn said BYU pays student playwrights just as if they were proven professionals. "The plays are the playwrights' property," Gunn said. "If BYU produces them, they have to negotiate finances with the student." Gunn said the standard payment is $50 to $60 per performance. Although Gunn receives pay for the performances, he makes no money on the show's merchandise, like "Smart Single Guys" T-shirts. "It's kind of funny," he said. "I have to buy my own shirt." The journey toward "Smart Single Guys'" production began over five years ago when Gunn and his friends began staging their personal work as Provo High students. "We were in a drama class together and we started doing pre-shows and skits," said Provo High alum and close friend Wells. "The skits were so popular that after our missions, we thought, 'Wouldn't it be fun if we performed the sketches again and people actually came to watch?'" Gunn and his friends sharpened their performance and scrounged for places to perform. The overwhelming positive response on opening night left the young returned missionaries pleasantly surprised. "The show was such a success, we performed it several times," Wells said. The comedy acts yielded sizable crowds, even when lack of availability forced the friends to perform at unconventional locations, such as an elementary school auditorium. The show's popularity spurred Gunn and his friends to create their own comedy troupe - the Provost Humor Company, where Gunn acted as producing director. When Gunn's BYU advanced playwriting class required him to write his own show, he decided to base it on his tried-and-true comedy material. "Smart Single Guys" was selected from 10 other student plays in the advanced play writing class to be produced as part of the BYU official season. BYU chooses one student play to produce formally each year. "When the department decided to do Tony's play, I leapt at the chance to direct it," said "Smart Single Guys" director Eric Samuelsen. "Tony has a very observant comic eye and spots the quirks and foibles we have." "Smart Single Guys" focuses on the flops and singular successes in the dating lives of three young men. "I chose to write 'Smart Single Guys' for my playwriting class because in the back of my mind I thought a play based on these skits would go over really well in the BYU season," Gunn said. "Tony has a lot invested in this," Wells said. "To take something we did as sketches in high school and then make it into a legitimate stage production is not easy." Despite the pressures of debuting a new show, Gunn's peers were confident his material could take the heat. "'Smart Single Guys' is so funny," said assistant stage manager Emily Combe. "They work- shopped the show last year, and I thought, 'This is the funniest play!' When I saw it was on for this season, I started to tell everyone, 'You have to come see it.'" Although Gunn does not direct the show, he was present at several rehearsals. "[It was] unique to have the writer at rehearsals," said cast member Bryson Hilton. "We did some script changes on the spot. It was nice to get his original viewpoint and work with him. He's very easy-going." Gunn said he plans on pursuing directing as his main focus, with playwriting on the side. When asked if he has considered turning "Smart Single Guys" into a film, Gunn said although it is a possibility, he has not spent a lot of time thinking about it. "I mostly wrote for a BYU audience," he said. "Beyond this, it's up in the air. I may possibly take it to grad schools or larger scales - just a few tweaks and it would probably be suitable for a general audience. There is potential for a screenplay, but it would be hard to get the same skit and feel." Theatergoers can purchase tickets for "Smart Single Guys" at the Harris Fine Arts Center Box Office or by calling the Box Office at 378-4322. Regular seats are $12 and students with ID's are $9. "Smart Single Guys" is playing in the Margetts Theater through December 6. It will be closed Thanksgiving week. Tickets are $12, $9 with student ID and can be purchased by calling 422-7664. Copyright, BYU NewsNet _________________________________________________________________ -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Deseret News: "South Park" Mormons Date: 19 Nov 2003 18:24:50 -0800 (PST) Wednesday, November 19, 2003 Today on TV South Park (8 p.m., Comedy Central): This episode of the rude, crude, animated series wasn't available for preview, but the cable channel describes it like this: "A Mormon kid moves to South Park and Stan has to kick his (butt). . . . When Stan and his dad meet their new Mormon neighbors, they become fascinated with how genuinely nice they are. While the other boys mock Stan relentlessly for wimping out, the rest of the town starts to believe that Mormons may not be so bad after all." C 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Elizabeth Petty Bentley" Subject: Re: [AML] Options for our conferences Date: 19 Nov 2003 10:24:37 +0000 Super idea. I'd buy the tapes/CDs/videos in a heartbeat. Beth Bentley >From: Melissa Proffitt >Reply-To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com >To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com >Subject: [AML] Options for our conferences >Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:51:47 -0700 > >I think we had a very good turnout for our writers conference, and we're >anticipating another good meeting in a few months with our Annual >Meeting. > >However, we know there are many AML-list subscribers who live too far >away to attend our functions. We would like to know if any of you would >be interested, in the future, in purchasing some kind of recording of >the conferences--either cassette, CD, or DVD. > >Right now this is just a very nebulous idea, so don't dive for your >checkbooks yet. But if you're interested, please let us know what would >be most useful. Writers conference or Annual Meeting (or both)? >Highlights or every session? Which media format is best? > >Thanks, >Melissa Proffitt > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > _________________________________________________________________ Share holiday photos without swamping your Inbox. Get MSN Extra Storage now! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=3Dfeatures/es -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JanaRiess@aol.com Subject: [AML] Mormon speech patterns Date: 19 Nov 2003 09:29:34 EST In a message dated 11/17/03 4:12:18 PM,=20 owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com writes: > There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? > > ~Jamie Laulusa > This is Utah, not just Mormon, but how about: "I fill of the Spirit"? Fillings, nothing more than fillings . . . . Jana Riess -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] Review: Pride and Prejudice, a Latter-day Comedy Date: 18 Nov 2003 20:18:54 -0700 >they very much enjoyed Darcy running handcuffed down the road... H'mmmm. Maybe I'll see it after all. barbara hume -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jared Walters Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon speech patterns Date: 20 Nov 2003 16:00:12 -0700 I took a Semantics class years ago where my professor actually had a=20 special lecture on Mormon grammar and their speech habits. One typical=20 characteristic is the need for Mormons to balance their nouns out and=20 verbs out with dual witnesses. An example is during prayers, to pray=20 for "no harm and danger", "love and charity" "He is kind AND generous" It can never be just one adjective for the average Mormon. On Wednesday, November 19, 2003, at 07:29 AM, JanaRiess@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 11/17/03 4:12:18 PM,=3D20 > owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com writes: > >> There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? >> >> ~Jamie Laulusa >> > > This is Utah, not just Mormon, but how about: > > "I fill of the Spirit"? > > Fillings, nothing more than fillings . . . . > Jana Riess > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard Johnson" Subject: RE: [AML] Mormon speech patterns Date: 20 Nov 2003 15:17:23 -0500 I can identify a number of speech patterns - stresses - etc that are western regional and even specific regional (like the harses that live in the borns in parts of Utah) but they don't seem specifically Mormon. There are vocabulary and grammatical constructs that really are Mormon and some of them go back many years. Who but a Mormon would ever say "I feel to tell you. . . . " but you will find it in one of three conference talks. The linguistic thing that drives me bonkers is that in Mormon language, "immorality" means only one thing, sexual misconduct. To me and almost everyone I know (as one who has avoided the areas where mormon culture is prevalent all his life)immorality takes in so many areas of life. Richard B. Johnson, Husband, Father, Grandfather, Actor, Director, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool. I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important- and most valuable. Http://www.PuppenRich.com -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of JanaRiess@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 9:30 AM In a message dated 11/17/03 4:12:18 PM,=3D20 owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com writes: > There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? > > ~Jamie Laulusa > This is Utah, not just Mormon, but how about: "I fill of the Spirit"? Fillings, nothing more than fillings . . . . Jana Riess -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Blair Young Subject: [AML] On marketing a static product Date: 20 Nov 2003 12:38:21 -0700 [moderator comment: Until _Standing on the Promises_ gets its own website, information about the series, including links to prior AML and other book reviews, can be found on the Mormon Literature Website at http://mormonlit.lib.byu.edu/lit_work.php?w_id=3D4179] Darius Gray and I have decided to become much more proactive in marketing our trilogy. I thought that the AML list might benefit from our discoveries, triumphs and failures--all of which are pending. So this is the first post of many as we undertake to sell _Standing on the Promises_ in a way that Deseret Book hasn't. We've realized that our books face some real problems with marketing under the Deseret Book paradigm. So the first issue is to identify the problem. Why haven't the books sold as well as we and Deseret Book had anticipated? My guesses follow, but if anyone has other insights, I'd be very interested. 1) Our observations at book signings suggest that there is an interest gap among white Mormons. Those who buy our books are usually involved with the black community in some way (including by having been born black) or have a keen intellectual interest in what we're doing. In the Deseret Book marketing plan, the question revolves around how we can pique interest in the white Mormon community. Catalogue advertising has not worked. Deseret Book has done for our product exactly what it does for others and had expected that sales would reflect their effort. Such has not been the case. What other avenues remain to get their targeted audience interested? Or should this audience even be considered the target audience? Is there a bigger, better audience which we should aim for in our independent efforts? I'd say yes. 2) Our books are not easy reads and some may even consider the last two volumes faith-challenging. So how do we find audiences willing to read hard books? Does the Deseret Book label put off some potential readers who might assume that our books represent the Mormon sugar-coating of the race issue? How can we move past that little barrier? I really do believe a large audience is THERE but hasn't been tapped. Over and over, we hear the question, "Why haven't I heard of these books?" My sense of things is that only Deseret Book/Seagull customers are likely to have heard of our work because they will have seen the catalogues. So what resources can we tap to get the news out to an interested group and to invite other readers who might assume that our job as Deseret Book authors has been to whitewash? When I went to the Barnes and Noble website, I found it very interesting that an ex-Mormon had posted a very favorable review of our work. He said it helped him understand the dedication of Mormons to their faith. 3) Do we need a website outside of Deseret Book? I have concluded that we do. I personally find the Deseret Book website difficult ot navigate. I would be surprised if anyone discovered our books on that website without already knowing they existed. And they'd have to know further that they are categorized under historical fiction, not under fiction and not under history. I suspect that those who want to find out about us would have an easier time going to Amazon.com or Barnesandnoble.com (both of which have incomplete listings of our books as of now, but will be complete soon.) So, there are some problems I've identified and some questions I'm asking myself at this point. We're at the beginning of our journey to actively market our books. We've even spoken to a generous member of the list who gave us some excellent advice. And I'm buying books about publicity. I am convinced that e-mails and letters to radio stations and newspapers have little effect without footwork, and that the most likely success will be generated by good connections. So we're identifying our good connections and beginning to work through them. I'll keep the list updated. Successes thus far: We recently taped a show for KBYU's "From the Podium", which will be broadcast later (not sure when). That's a start. I am working on this project daily. I should list as failures my various e-mails to newspapers, radio and television shows--never answered. How many of those actually get through to someone who can do a thing? My guess is that the percentage is less than 1%. I can see the need for agents and publicists and have considered using the agent I used at an earlier point in my career, but since our books are already published, I doubt she' be interested. Certainly, if knew everything about LDS publishing which I know now, I would've used my agent. So the question is, can an author do for herself/himself what an agent or publicist would do? I guess we'll see. Margaret Young -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Patricia Wiles" Subject: RE: [AML] My Web Page Date: 20 Nov 2003 19:36:08 -0600 Hello-- I joined this list a few weeks ago, and this is my first post. If=20 Someone does plan to do a links page, we would appreciate having our site listed. http://www.latterdayauthors.com/ Our group started this site about two months ago. (You can read about=20 Them here: http://www.latterdayauthors.com/about/about.htm) The writers who work on this site with me are a joy to be associated with--some of them are members of this list. Our goal, as listed on the site, is to provide "information for all writers, with inspiration and support based on the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." Our site is based more on nurturing and encouragement, rather than a critical, literary focus. One of the problems most writers have, whether new or established, is getting started and enduring to the completion of a project. We hope through our site to offer that needed support.=20 Building a website has been one of the most challenging things I've ever done, basically because I knew nothing about it when I started. The=20 initial site looked kind of rough, but I was just glad to get something up that worked. With a little more sweat and brain drain I "remodeled" the site over the weekend, and while I still have much to learn at least now the site navigates much better and looks a little more professional. We have a great writer's forum, with lots of interesting topics and discussion. A group of writers have just finished our first Book in a Week event (thanks to Cindy Bezas, who was the "mother hen" that gathered the chicks under her wing). The results have been extraordinary, with a wonderful sense of camaraderie among the participants and a collective feeling of accomplishment for all the work produced. You are invited to visit, read some of our articles and forum postings,=20 And even submit articles for publication on the site (you can read our submission guidelines for more information). The site is a labor of=20 love, so unfortunately we can't offer pay for articles. We are basically a 24/7 writers conference where the rooms are always open for writers, whether they need to learn or are willing to share their knowledge. Patricia Wiles Executive Editor, latterdayauthors.com Member National Society of Newspaper Columnists Member Society of Children's Book Writers and Illustrators =20 -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Marny Parkin Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 10:08 AM I have a web page, but it has nothing about me on it. It is a=3D20 bibliography of speculative fiction written by and about Mormons=3D20 (novels, short stories, poetry, and nonfiction). If anyone knows of something I've missed, please let me know! Marny Parkin www.MormonSF.org -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Andrew Sullivan on "Angels In America" Date: 20 Nov 2003 17:03:52 -0800 (PST) In what is the opening shot of what is sure to be a heated debate on HBO's "Angels In America", Andrew Sullivan disputes the play's historical accuracy in "The New Republic": http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=fisking&s=sullivan111803 ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Joshua Ligairi" Subject: Re: [AML] "South Park" & Mormons Date: 20 Nov 2003 18:19:40 -0700 South Park creators/writers Trey Parker and Matt Stone have a long-standing relationship with the LDS faith in their work. They have mentioned LDS charcters in several episodes of the television show (Joseph Smith even makes an appearance) as well as in three feature films. While researching a paper that I wrote about LDS representation in the media I came across the following interesting tid-bits on the internet: Protestant writer/filmmaker Trey Parker was born October 19, 1969 in=20 Conifer, Jefferson County, CO., next to South Park County. He grew up around Mormons and had many Mormon friends. In 1997, together with Jewish friend Matt Stone, Parker created the pilot for the hit animated television show SOUTH PARK. The rest, as they say is history. But before there was SOUTH PARK, Parker and Stone made CANNIBAL! THE MUSICAL while still struggling film students. The plot revolves around Mormon leader Alfred Packer, the only man in U.S. history every convicted of a crime related to cannibalism. On trial for cannibalism, Packer recounts the story of his journey from the Utah to the Colorado territories from his prison cell. As Packer leads a group of Mormon miners through the wild west in search of gold, things begin to go awry. Packer and his men run into a group of evil trappers who steal their horses. Things only get worse as the Packer Party get lost in the Colorado Rockies, running out of food, and having to take a page out of the Donner Party cookbook in order to survive. In South Park's movie 'Bigger, Longer, and Uncut' one of the characters dies and goes to hell. This is what happens as explained by an internet South Park enthusist: When Kenny goes in hell, he meets evil people during his ride. Hitler,=20 George Burns and... Gandhi. Why would Gandhi be in hell ? He was a good, non-violent man. Later it is revealed that it is because Mormons are the only "true" religion. As one character puts it, the only people "stupidly perfect" enough to get into Heaven. Since Gandhi wasn't a Mormon, he ended up in Hell. The latest South Park episode 'All About Mormons' is only the latest in a long line of LDS themed material from Trey Parker and Matt Stone. The show, which aired Wednesday night, is described on Comedy Central's website as follows: A Mormon kid moves to South Park and Stan has to kick his a@*. But when Stan and his dad meet their new Mormon neighbors, they become fascinated with how genuinely nice they are. While the other boys mock Stan relentlessly for wimping out, the rest of the town become Mormons. Yes, that's right folks...become Mormons. I wish I had seen the episode just out of curiosity.=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Dixon" Subject: Re: [AML] Deseret News: "South Park" Mormons Date: 20 Nov 2003 13:49:42 -0500 It was a pretty funny episode, but took a very negative view of early Mormon history -- essentially saying that everyone who believed Joseph Smith's claims were dumb, but skeptics like Martin Harris's wife were smart for doubting. Modern Mormons come off looking pretty good, if you consider a preternaturally nice, happy family as an accurate view of modern Mormons. Eric D. Dixon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Nan P. McCulloch" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon speech patterns Date: 20 Nov 2003 14:30:46 -0700 How about mell (mail), pell (pail), tell (tail) ? This letter came in the mell. I carried water in the pell. My dog hurt his tell. Nan McCulloch ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 7:29 AM > In a message dated 11/17/03 4:12:18 PM,=20 > owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com writes: > > > There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? > > > > ~Jamie Laulusa > > > > This is Utah, not just Mormon, but how about: > > "I fill of the Spirit"? > > Fillings, nothing more than fillings . . . . > Jana Riess > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S. Bezas" Subject: RE: [AML] Options for our conferences Date: 20 Nov 2003 15:00:49 -0500 I also would be very interested in being able to purchase CD recordings of each seminar from the conference. Cindy C.S. Bezas Board of Editors, Advisory Chair LatterDayAuthors.com http://www.latterdayauthors.com A Christian Lifestyle http://www.bellaonline.com/site/lds -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Melissa Proffitt Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 2:52 PM I think we had a very good turnout for our writers conference, and we're anticipating another good meeting in a few months with our Annual Meeting. However, we know there are many AML-list subscribers who live too far away to attend our functions. We would like to know if any of you would be interested, in the future, in purchasing some kind of recording of the conferences--either cassette, CD, or DVD. Right now this is just a very nebulous idea, so don't dive for your checkbooks yet. But if you're interested, please let us know what would be most useful. Writers conference or Annual Meeting (or both)? Highlights or every session? Which media format is best? Thanks, Melissa Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "John Hajicek" Subject: [AML] Rare first edition Book of Mormon (Palmyra: 1830) online Date: 24 Nov 2003 15:15:06 -0600 [moderator's note: though we are very careful about commercial announcements on AML-List, I think our listmembers will be very interested by the full online version of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon announced here] _____ The most expensive American book printed after 1800 is a Mormon book. There are several other Mormon books equally historical. Now, a complete first edition Book of Mormon (Palmyra, 1830) is entirely viewable, on the Internet sites http://www.iNephi.com and http://www.Palmyra1830.com - which are just now officially launched. Until now, monumental Mormon books were preserved exclusively in the Nation's major research libraries which hold our American heritage. A first edition Book of Mormon is owned each by Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Southern Methodist University (SMU) - all private institutions. Publicly owned copies are kept secure by the Library of Congress, the New York Public Library, and the University of California, Berkeley. Famous Americana collectors have also sought after this book for its influence on American history. Many successful and educated people in California, Utah, and the West own copies, including non-Mormon collectors of Americana and Western Americana. Even Bill Gates is known to display a copy in his prestigious library facing the Olympic Mountains on the shores of Lake Washington. The remaining copies are held onto tightly by families with an early Mormon ancestry, deep Mormon roots, and strong faith. At last, we all can examine a copy of the original Book of Mormon with our friends, page by page, and compare it side by side with a modern version. I have created an Internet site with a hyperlinked copy of all 600 pages in full color photographs. You can view this first edition Book of Mormon at either http://www.iNephi.com or http://www.Palmyra1830.com This is my tribute to a book that shaped our country. =20 _____ With kindest regards, I look forward to hearing back from you. - John --=20 John Hajicek Manuscript Archivist and Historian of Rare Books http://www.Mormonism.com (816) 220-3141 (Home) (816) 220-3142 (Cell) (816) 220-3143 (Fax) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Review: STEWART, Farewell To Eden Date: 24 Nov 2003 15:35:21 -0700 Review: Farewell To Eden So Thursday, I zipped over to UVSC to see Farewell to Eden, a debut play by a new, young Mormon playwright, Mahonri Stewart. James Arrington said it was a good play, and he directed the UVSC production, so I had high expectations. And the play is indeed a very powerful and impressive debut. Mahonri Stewart; remember that name. Farewell to Eden is a sort of cross between drawing room comedy and melodrama. If I had to pick one, I'd say it was very much in the tradition of urban melodrama of the mid-nineteenth century. That probably sounds like a put-down, but I don't mean it to be; I'm just trying to categorize it for you. Fact is, there was a 19th C. tradition of urban melodrama focusing on social class, in which we see upper class people as having all the power and money, and therefore having ostensibly good lives, but they're actually all hypocrites, and are secretly miserable, while honest laboring folk are fundamentally moral and happy and good, though poor and lacking power. It's very interesting to me to see a Mormon playwright deal with those sorts of issues, because they reflect Brigham Young's own critique of class and economics. Brigham Young served his mission in England in the 1840's, and was appalled by the class structure he saw there. He was a first hand observer of the Industrial Revolution, or specifically, laissez faire economics, both of which he saw as viciously destructive. And of course, Brigham's critique of class echoes the Book of Mormon, which is certainly no fan of whatever cultural constructions of class are implied by the term 'kingmen,' and which consistently regards a failure to take care of the poor as the defining characteristic of sinful pride.=20 So, structurally, looking at Mahonri's play, here's what's going on: three siblings belonging to a wealthy family named the 'Highetts' (lovely Sheridanesque name, that one) have just lost their father. They nonetheless pursue typical upper class aims, specifically marriage, romance, and literature. They're visited by Brigham Young and John Taylor, who preach to them briefly, but gain converts only among their dressmakers. The humble dressmakers join the Church, and their lives improve. Meanwhile, the Highetts' lives grow more and more wretched. That's basically the plot. Expressed this baldly, the plot probably seems overtly didactic and uninteresting. But it's written much more skillfully than I've suggested. There's genuine wit and bite in the dialogue, and the characters are sharply drawn. I've focused on plot here, because I'm pretty cheered by it. As someone who is politically leftist, I see this not only as an interesting play by a new Mormon writer, but also as a new play by another interesting leftist.=20 Were I conservative, however, I think there'd be a lot to like in the play as well, especially if I were a Mormon cultural conservative. After all, it's a play in which two prophets preach repentance to a variety of people. Some listen, repent, and are happier. Others don't listen, don't repent, and are miserable. Again, I've described the plot in reductive terms, and that's unfair; it's a much more interestingly subtle play than I've described. But my point is, I'm a liberal, and I liked it, in part because I saw this as an interestingly 'liberal' play. But I have no idea if Mahonri sees himself as a 'liberal' author at all. I rather suspect he doesn't. If I were a conservative, I think I'd like it just as much.=20 Let's take structure a different direction. The play is set in 1840. The protagonist is a woman named Georgiana Highett. She's a writer, and a snob; she talks a lot about the 'lower orders' and how they're here on earth to serve, well, her. (She also mentions her friend 'Charlie Dickens,' which is a mistake; no close friend of Charles Dickens would ever hold her views on class.) Anyway, she rather rejects 'high society' with its sexual intrigues and dances, in part because she genuinely thinks herself homely, and unable to attract a man. And then Stephen Lockhart, an old family friend, comes to visit, and she finds herself very much wanting to attract him, although he's initially more interested in Georgiana's more attractive sister, Catherine. Catherine is herself intrigued by a young man with the delightfully NASCAR name of Darrel Fredericks, and so the first several scenes of the play are drawing room comedy, with lots of intrigue and a fun double love triangle. Georgiana likes Stephen, who likes Catherine, who likes Darrel, who, it turns out, isn't entirely uninterested in Georgiana. And hovering about them all like an absurdly overdressed moth, is the third Highett, brother to the girls, the brainless fop Thomas. Anyway, Georgiana decides to have a new dress made, in order to attract Stephen, and hires two dressmaker sisters, Hannah and Esther, to make it. And then Brigham Young and John Taylor show up. Georgiana archly dismisses them; Stephen seems somewhat taken with them. Meanwhile, the two missionaries insist on including the household staff in their discussion, and Hannah and Esther are fascinated. Mary, the gossipy Old Family Retainer (former governess? maid-in-waiting? head chambermaid?) drops in her own humorous asides, and whole thing felt very drawing room comedy. (I'm wracking my brain to think of a playwright I could suggest to Mahonri as a model-British comic playwrights in the 1840's? Maybe the young Dion Boucicault; I think London Assurance was about 1841. Or maybe Tom Robertson.) And it had some wit and flair to it, and I really did want to know which of the guys would end up with which of the girls. (And yet, I also wasn't disappointed when that issue turned out to be something of a non-starter.) The drawing room comedy part of the play is nicely written. We see a lot of Catherine and Georgiana's relationship; Georgiana is waspish about Catherine's social ambitions, and Catherine affects nonchalance; she's pretty and popular, so who cares what sis thinks? And yet, throughout the play, we also get a real sense of family. Georgiana is a very interesting character, very bright, and yet insecure and fragile emotionally. She may insult her sister, but she's also protective of her, and we do see that the sisters genuinely care for each other. And Thomas may be a brainless twit, but he's charmingly naive about things. He's the one who invites the missionaries up, as a lark. And then the missionaries leave. (I really like the idea of a play in which Brigham Young and John Taylor are characters, in which they're only onstage for about five minutes.) And the play shifts in tone, and nasty character stuff is revealed. It becomes a melodrama, though again, this isn't a put-down. For starters, we learn that Thomas, the gormless fop, is actually nothing of the kind. He's a crook, and he's wasting the family's inheritance, and trying to cover it up through embezzlement. And Darrell Fredericks is a slimy weasel, who is blackmailing Thomas, and trying to marry one of Thomas' sisters, so he can also get his hands on the family money. Catherine, it turns out, has not been as primly chaste as she's led us to believe. And each of these explosions shocks Georgiana, who, for all her intelligence, hasn't ever suspected any of it. Georgiana has also really fallen in love with Stephen, who, it turns out, is more interested in one, or both, of the dressmakers. (I must say, when Young and Taylor exit their short scene, two pretty dressmakers in tow, I must confess to a certain unworthy amusement. Those two guys, in 1840? Heh heh heh.) Georgiana goes off the deep end, and ends up stabbing (non-fatally, thank heavens) one of the dressmakers. At the end of the play, Stephen reveals that he's decided to join the Church and join the dressmakers in Nauvoo. Mary leaves the old family manse, having been badly treated by Georgiana one time too many. Thomas' crimes are revealed, and so is Catherine's folly, and Fredericks is finally expelled from the home. At the end of the play, all the family furniture has been sold to pay Thomas' debts, and Georgiana bids Stephen, and even the house itself, goodbye. The play's biggest strength, and also its biggest weakness, has to do with class. I love the idea of a play set in the 1840's which reflects Brigham Young's ideas about class and wealth and laissez faire. I love plugging into that specific melodramatic tradition. Nowadays, when East Bench Mormons get the prime seats at General Conference, and all Sunday School lessons on Book of Mormon economics or King Benjamin's address have to include the obligatory codicil: 'of course, wealth isn't bad at all, we know that, it just depends on what you do with it,' this play points up some uncomfortable historical realities. Laissez faire's been tried. A prophet of God saw it. He hated everything about it. At the same time, class itself is something American playwrights generally struggle with. The British class system, ca. 1840, is something we will really probably never completely understand. Mahonri does his best with it, and his best is pretty darned good, but I kept noticing these little anachronisms. Fredericks and Georgiana talk about their school days together. The Highetts are supposed to be 'upper class,' but they don't have a country estate, their father was a businessman, and his best friend is a publisher. A lot of the play suggests a writer who has read a whole lot of Jane Austen. Good for him. But Jane Austen was a middle-class writer, describing middle-class realities. They only seem upper class to us, because the clothes look so cool, and they have servants, and besides, we're Americans and really truly don't get it. Still and all, it's a tremendous debut. I liked the play a lot, and am anxious to see what Mahonri does next. The production is very fine, especially Margie Johnson's brittle, brilliant Georgiana, and Amber Jones' moving and subtle subtextual pain as Catherine and Brandon West's stunning transformation from twit Thomas to snake Thomas. I'm very impressed. Eric Samuelsen=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marvin Payne Date: 25 Nov 2003 13:52:54 -0700 I've never been a visitor to South Park, but there's an interesting=20 observation about it in this week's U.S.News column by John Leo. Seems=20 that the south South Park makers are kind of unafraid to assail liberal=20 positions (among whatever else they may assail), making them a rarity=20 in the pop media. The reference that made me laugh was to a South Park=20 mother who wanted to abort her child ("It's my body!") even though the=20 boy was eight years old. A funny joke, but the implications are really=20 quite astounding. Marvin Payne ____________________ Visit marvinpayne.com! "Come unto Christ, and lay hold upon every good gift..." (from the last page of the Book of Mormon) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Elizabeth Petty Bentley" Subject: [AML] American Book Publishing Date: 21 Nov 2003 11:59:15 +0000 Some time ago American Book Publishing was mentioned on the list, and I=20 forwarded the info I found on their web site to my friend, Judy Kigin, who passed it on to her friend Gary. For what it's worth, here's what Gary later told her. I assume sfwa is the Science Fiction Writers of American, a reputable source. Beth Bentley ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary Jacobson To: Kigin Family Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 1:35 AM Subject: American Book Publishing Judy, I was just looking at the website "Writer Beware Alerts" concerning unscrupulous publishers and agents that take advantage of writers, and I came across this about the publishing company your friend recommended: American Book Publishing/C. Lee Nunn Owner/President Writer Beware has received substantial complaints about American Book=20 Publishing (C. Lee Nunn, owner). ABP, which presents itself as a "traditional" publisher, requires its=20 authors to pay a sizeable "setup" fee. Complaints include non-standard contract terms, non-production of promised e-book editions, non-fulfillment of marketing and publicity promises, repeatedly delayed publication schedules, finished books full of errors, non-payment of royalties, heavy pressure on authors to purchase bulk numbers of their own books, and harassment of those who question or complain. American Book Publishing has been the focus of a police investigation. Authors with complaints about American Book Publishing are urged to=20 contact Writer Beware: beware@sfwa.org.=20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "David and Dianna Graham" Subject: [AML] Pride and Prejudice women, etc. Date: 24 Nov 2003 16:58:52 -0700 Well, I have a little free time, and I'm lonely and bored. So I thought I'd share some of thoughts on P&P. I liked it a lot, though I think I'll like it a little better when I'm not surrounded by teens and pre-teens loudly sighing, gasping, and cheering for every little moment in the film. I'm also intrigued by the way this film is being advertised. On one level, the preview audience and the word of mouth thingy makes a lot of sense considering the lack of budget for advertising. Since most of you have seen the trailer for this film, though, you would probably agree that if there was _any_ way they could scrape up money for a few well placed TV spots, this film would do very well in the theatre. The trailer alone is fun, and the movie would cross just fine into any teenage/college co-ed audience, regardless of religion. Alas, I understand that we are talking about lots and lots of money for TV spots, so I hope this word of mouth thing works well. (Or I hope I'm wrong, and they do have the budget for TV). Back to the women in it: I thought they were great. It was a nice cast, and Kam Heskin was particularly fun. I still don't think her hair should've been done the way it was. (I know, who cares about hair, but...) She was supposed to be attractive and nicely groomed but not overdone, and, I'm sorry, but I've never, not once in my short 29 years, met a woman whose hair naturally curls that way. Those are sponge curler, hot roller, or curling iron curls, not natural ones. The closest I've seen natural curls to that is an old YA acquaintance who would majorly gel and hairspray her hair before blow drying it each day, and her hair was still really different.(Fun anecdote: One day in Hong Kong, as that YA friend had just started her hair dryer and was about to dry her hair, she looked over and realized that the blow dryer was shooting out flames. I guess she hadn't adjusted her hairdryer to the different electrical output yet. Thank goodness she had not yet put her hair in it's path. So we all were able to laugh at the event and not look back on it as the tragic loss of a beautiful head of hair). My point is, it takes a good deal of work to make curls like that, and yet it was clear that we were suppose to believe that Elizabeth was pretty low maintenance and those curls were natural. I didn't believe it for one second, and Kam Heskins looks great with straight or wavy hair and did not need the fake hair-style. Speaking of low maintenance, my first perception from the trailer, which actually had more to do with the website pictures with the porcelain skin and the hot roller curls, was completely off. My perception at this point might be a little askew because bad traffic and a late arrival for my guest landed us three rows from the front. Just the same, while I was watching and enjoying this nice film with these nice, attractive actors, I kept thinking for everyone but Lydia and Kitty, "Please mask now." Hello pores!! Boy was I wrong, and I felt like Lydia watching the film. Foundation and powder! Please, Ladies! But seriously, I had slightly mixed feelings about the lack of primpage that went into prepping these stars for the camera. Was it lighting that left them looking like the surface of the moon? Was it the old Scera theatre screen? I don't think so. Lydia looked really nice. I mean, big pores and overly sweaty faces during a jogging scene is one thing, but most of the other scenes? Sheesh! There was also an abundance of very dark lipstick that didn't always flatter the way it needed to. Of course, 90% percent of the shots used in the cut I saw (and I'm not exaggerating) were either mediums or close-ups. Is that normal? If so, why did it feel so funny? I felt a little frustrated for Anne, who did a terrific job with the Production Design (in the house in particular), and very little of it was featured at all. I'm not asking for a still shot of every room or anything. I just felt at times like we were watching the story from a perspective of a drunk, where everything is just a little fuzzy and people seem to really be in your face all of the time. My husband asked me about the plot and the script, and I, with my amateur eye and perception, responded, "Well, they took the Pride and Prejudice out of it." What I meant is not that they were completely unfaithful to the book or anything. They did a lot of fun things with it, and I really enjoyed a few of the plot changes in it. But, like Jacob, I didn't see much of an arch for Darcy, and I kind of missed the whole "he's proud, she's prejudice" thing. He seemed proud for about ten seconds, and then suddenly, he was enraptured with her singing "Bring Back My Bonnie to Me." I also missed the crafty deception of Jack Wickham and Elizabeth's fascination with him. You pretty much knew from the first moment on that he was sleazy walking testosterone. It was impossible to figure out why Elizabeth would hang out with him, unless we were supposed to think she was just walking on the wild side a little. He was kind of cute, though. All of the above said, I look forward to seeing it again. It was very fun, and there were a lot of great things about it. Besides, the projector went out about 60 seconds before the end, just as they were showing the exterior of... (Wait, would that be a spoiler?? I'll refrain.) Anyway, I have a theory that it was planned so that no one who saw the film at a preview could feel satisfied without paying and seeing it again. Maybe I'm just paranoid, though. Two thoughts have really stuck in my mind since the viewing. First, I know that Film Directing majors at BYU have a lot on their plate, but I really think they need to have a few more acting classes in their curriculum. They got a really nice, talented cast that delivered pretty well in this film, but the first ten minutes were really shaky to me. I noticed it when I was at the Y, and I notice it now. BYU film majors and grads are not usually very good judges of acting, and I don't know if a majority of them understand at all how to cast or work with actors. After the first ten minutes, things seemed to improve for me. I may have just gotten used to it, though. No wonder one of my all time favorite director's is Sydney Pollack. It helped me see a little more why I prefer Richard's films the other LDS films. My second thought is basically this. No more ending narration to tie up the film! It made more sense to me in this film than it has in any of the other LDS made films, largely because Austen herself tied up the various plots in her book with a paragraph or two about the characters. It requires too little craft, however, and it's just a cheap way for the writer to finish a story. It made me think about how my much father-in-law, a wonderful musician, absolutely loathes a popular 80's music trend to fade out songs instead of writing actual endings. As one of my favorite vampires from an alternate reality would say, "Bored now." Dianna Graham -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Dixon" Subject: [AML] Mormons on South Park Date: 21 Nov 2003 02:20:33 -0500 [I just posted this to my blog, here: http://www.shrubbloggers.com/archives/20031116.html#e20031121-0207am It's about Wednesday night's new South Park episode, about a Mormon family moving to town... EDD] Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb November 21, 2003=20 2:07 a.m. I guess I should comment on Wednesday night's episode of South Park. For those of you who didn't see it, it was about a Mormon kid and his family who move to town. The kids at school and Stan Marsh's parents find the new family's preternatural happy friendliness off-putting at first, but Stan and the Marsh family are gradually won over. But as they learn more about the family's religion, we're treated to reenactments of early Mormon history stuff like Joseph Smith being visited by the angel Moroni, translating the Book of Mormon, etc. with musical narration and a catchy refrain: "Dum, dum, dum, dum dum." As the intermittent "historical" clips progress, and Joseph Smith's stories and claims seem more and more outlandish, we realize that the refrain is a comment on the religion and its believers: "Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb dumb." (I realized it would come to this during the first refrain, incidentally.) When someone finally demonstrates real skepticism (Martin Harris's wife, no less), the refrain changes to: "Smart, smart, smart, smart smart." Stan becomes a skeptic himself, and denounces his new Mormon friend. But the episode ends on a note of tolerance, as the Mormon family is revealed to be sincere in their happy friendliness and the Mormon kid takes Stan to task: (paraphrasing) "Maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up. But even if he did, I don't really care. Today, the church teaches families how to love each other and live good lives. I have a great life, and the Book of Mormon is responsible for that. But just because I have different beliefs, you let that stand in the way of friendship. You have a lot of growing up to do." Roll credits. Earlier tonight, Michael Malice sent me a message about the show: >i really liked that they had a pro-mormon message at the end. although most >stupid people think the show is evil, they're actually fairly balanced in >the show with their iconoclasm. It also would have been very easy for them >to show the family as phonies, but the fact that they were genuinely loving >and caring I thought was clever. Yeah, they've pulled out great endings like that many times like in the Big Gay Al scoutmaster episode, and the "Harbucks" coffee chain episode. I thought Wednesday night's episode was pretty damn funny, but it's always frustrating that Trey Parker gets so many Mormon details wrong, even while he demonstrates that he's done a fair amount of research (as in Orgazmo). He pared Mormon history down to a series of absurd scenes that strain credulity. Not that those moments didn't (kinda, sorta) happen, there's just so much missing context. As an example, here's a good paper on Book of Mormon translation (from a critical but ultimately apologetic institutional Mormon perspective). However, satire should ignore context, and this was effective satire. I really laughed harder during this episode than I have in quite awhile. But painting someone like Martin Harris as clueless and deluded just ignores too much history. I mean, Harris said stuff like this all the time: "Yes, I did see the plates on which the Book of Mormon was written. I did see the angel, I did hear the voice of God, and I do know that Joseph Smith is a true Prophet of God, holding the keys of the Holy Priesthood." If he was following a charlatan, Harris wasn't "dumb" he was in on it, or purposefully living a lie. (But I don't think these options make much sense in context, either.) I think this episode is ultimately good for Mormons, partly because it's positive toward modern family-oriented Mormonism in the end, but also because Mormons should be able to understand and deal with difficult historical questions (of which there are many) from an outsider's perspective and this kind of pop-culture exposure might force some worthwhile confrontations . . . Eric D. Dixon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] The envious critic (was Harry Potter) Date: 23 Nov 2003 10:44:33 -0700 [moderator's comment: Let's be careful to avoid ad hominem arguments in our posts. I think Scott makes some good points here about the nature of our critical discussion, but let's keep the "brotherly" in references to our brothers (or sisters) :)] Thom Duncan wrote: > Scott Parkin wrote: > > >think both Brother Samuelson and Brother Dutcher > >went over the line with their criticism of _The Singles Ward > > > > Unless we ultimately adopt the idea that art has no inherent rules, then > I don't see how we can claim that criticism of art is unwarranted. I didn't mean to suggest that the film shouldn't have been criticized. Far from it, I think the film should be criticized with the same vigor and effort as any other film, book or work of art. But I frankly don't see how polemic about wanting to kill yourself and/or leave the Church as a result of this film really qualifies as useful or usable criticism. It's venting. It's spleen. It's interesting to read and does less to reveal the film than to reveal the assumptions of the reviewer. The statements made no effort to improve the film, they only ridiculed it. When someone called his bluff, Brother Samuelson upped the ante and said he meant every word, and that he *literally* wanted to kill himself. Where's the critical value in that? How does that aid the filmmakers to improve their art? I agree with you on the general case--I love Brother Samuelson's insight. I think people would do well to listen to his commentary, and I think storytellers should go to extreme effort to understand both the nature of his criticism and the reasons behind it. He has a powerful understanding of art and context and the impact of the words on audiences. But in this specific instance, I think he went too far. I think he was hurtful and I think he knew he was doing it. The fact that he's a working artist makes the condemnation that much more damaging; he knows that his position of authority lends his words more weight. Which is why I think Brother Dutcher shouldn't have commented at all--he's become far too big a hammer to wield against a film that made few if any pretensions to art. It doesn't matter whether his criticism was valid; as the reputed "father of Mormon cinema" Dutcher's opinions carry too much weight to be casually used against another working artist. Having said that, I think some absolutely valid points of criticism were made. I think the film could have been better than it was, which is to say that it could have succeeded better on its own terms. I think the transition from funny to serious failed--as it does in most comedies. I think characters were undermined by some scenes that could have been rehandled. There were some clear weaknesses of craft that could easily have been addressed prior to release that would have given detractors less ammo. When the discussion was about how the film could have been better (I think this discussion is where Brother Samuelson first introduced the concept of a "death wish" scene to the list) I thought there was enormous value in it. But the context set at the beginning--that Mormon artists should leave the Church or die rather than allow this film to exist--undermined the egalitarian quality of the remainder of the discussion. For me, at least. Nothing is out of bounds when the discussion is focused on improvement rather than condemnation. But for me, contexts matter--in criticism as well as in story. Scott Parkin -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] John Moyer questions? Date: 21 Nov 2003 12:54:31 -0700 I am working on an interview of HaleStorm screenwriter John Moyer for Irreantum's forthcoming film package. I believe Moyer has been primary screenwriter for "Singles Ward," "R.M.," and the forthcoming "Home Teachers." Would anyone be willing to suggest any questions for us to ask him? Reply on the list or directly to me, whatever you prefer. (For the film package, we've already completed a Neil LaBute interview, and he gave us a short story to accompany the interview and also promised to review "Brigham City," which we sent him because he hadn't seen it yet.) Chris Bigelow -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] New Edition of the BoM (Was: "another book query") Date: 03 Nov 2003 14:03:13 -0800 I reviewed it here a few months ago. The review should be in the=20 archive. If not, let me know and I'll re-send it. At 03:33 PM 10/31/2003, you wrote: >Richard Johnson wrote: > >| My son, Ryan (a former member of the list who got into management and >| doesn't - he says- have time to read his work Email , let alone the >| list) who is a Librarian at Washington State University told me that, >| last month, his library received a really beautiful new version of the >| Book of Mormon, published by the University of Illinois. It was, he >| says, edited from a nineteenth century edition and given a really nice >| treatment by the publisher. > >I found this book on the site for the U of Illinois Press. Here's the link: > >http://www.press.uillinois.edu/s03/hardy.html > >It does indeed look like it's been nicely done. Thanks for the tip,=3D > Richard. >Now I have another book to put on my Christmas wishlist. > >I don't remember any discussion on the list about this new edition, either. >Has anyone out there read and/or seen this? Is it as nice as the website >makes it sound? > >-Quinn Warnick > > > > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > ---------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com jeffneedle@tns.net -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jared Walters Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 10 Nov 2003 16:44:58 -0700 Eric, I think I agree with your overall opinion of the movie. Most of the=20 things that made me cringe in the movie were little details. I didn't=20 mind the fact that the producers chose to shoot the flick somewhere=20 outside of Utah, but they could've done a better job at making the Nova=20 Scotia location pass for Salt Lake county. I mean the town they chose=20 looks nothing like Salt Lake with its quaint buildings and continuous=20 cloudy atmosphere. It's not quite as bad "Handcart" and their poor=20 location scouting. But some of the scenery is laughable like the=20 precinct where Ed Smart reunites with Elizabeth looks like some poorly=20 converted museum with cheesy block letters on a brick wall saying "Salt=20 Lake City Police" , but alas it's just a minute detail that most people=20 who haven't been to Salt Lake will overlook. Kind of like Ed and=20 Lois Smart's east coast accents and Mary Catherine's Canadian brogue=20 when she says: "He was abowwt in the howwsse on the rohff" , but she's=20 a kid so I can't nitpick too much. It won't surprise me if we see=20 another movie about this story. Hollywood just loves to capitalize on=20 true stories with happy endings. On Monday, November 10, 2003, at 10:43 AM, Eric Samuelsen wrote: > Approved: cracker=3D20 > > Last night, we had the rare opportunity to watch one of two made for TV > fact-based movies, the one on Elizabeth Smart and the one on Jessica > Lynch. I watched The Elizabeth Smart Story, then switched to Jessica on > commercial breaks. I suppose it counts as Mormon lit. > > The Elizabeth Smart Story surprised me. The approach was low key, and > quiet, a good deal less sensational than most teleplays in the genre, > and it hewed fairly close to the facts, at least as far as I know them. > I did follow the Elizabeth Smart story with some interest, but I > certainly don't presume to know it well enough to know exactly when they > took artistic license. I did notice a few liberties: when Elizabeth was > found by Sandy police, she did eventually--after a twenty minute > interview--say 'thou sayist it.' I don't believe she added 'I say it.' > I think they were trying to make Elizabeth appear just that tiny bit > more volitional, just a tad less brainwashed. Understandable, and I > didn't mind it. I do know that they didn't have the Smarts escort > Elizabeth through a huge crowd of media when they took her home from the > station. > > The teleplay really downplayed the sexual aspect of Elizabeth's > kidnapping, and frankly, I was glad. Mitchell did call her his 'wife,' > and a note at the end referred to him being formally charged with > aggravated sexual assault. That's enough. Elizabeth's ordeal was > horrific enough; they didn't need to sensationalize the worst part of > it.=3D20 > > I read one review of the movie that criticized the acting. Frankly, I > thought Dylan Baker was fine as Ed Smart. I thought he met what seems > to me a tremendous challenge; playing a decent human being trapped in an > awful situation and dealing with it as best he could. It was a quietly > effective, non-histrionic performance. I also liked Lindsay Frost as > Lois Smart; again, she was quietly believable throughout. The scenes > where you see the pressure the kidnapping put on their marriage were > very well done, I thought. Again, nobody screamed at anyone; they > played it as two basically decent people, committed to each other and to > their family, but genuinely disagreeing on how to proceed.=3D20 > > The scenes with Amber Marshall as Elizabeth and Tom Everett as Mitchell > were less effective. Everett played Mitchell as a more or less generic > religious loon, instead of as a specifically Mormon loon. The writing > led him that direction, of course, but still, I didn't hear Mitchell's > former connections to Mormon culture in his speech patterns, in the > falling inflections and the word emphases peculiar to our = culture.=3D20 > > At the same time, I'm a bit relieved that that choice was made. Frankly, > I think most folks are able to see that it wasn't Mormon culture or > Mormon theology that produced Mitchell. Mental illness is what produced > him. But while our culture didn't produce him, it did provide him with > his unique vocabulary. Mormonism played a very small role in this > movie, and that was fine with me.=3D20 > > We didn't need to see much of Emmanuel's wanderings. Elizabeth may > indeed have tried as intrepidly to escape as she did in this movie, but > it's inconsistent with what else we know of the story. But really, the > story here is of Ed Smart, and his persistent unwillingness to give up. > He's the only person who initially believed Mary Catherine's > identification of Emmanuel (which still seems to me quite wonderful and > miraculous), and he's the only person who really did anything about it. > > The Salt Lake police come across as well-intentioned bozos in this > movie, and that's all to the good. There's not much question that they > blew the case five ways from Wednesday. I especially liked their > repeated assertions that 'we're doing all we can,' and 'trust us, we > know what we're doing.' And I thought Baker's gradual disillusionment > with such comments was very nicely portrayed. > > I thought it was quite a well done film, given that it was a made for TV > movie. And there's one last thing I need to say about it. There's been > a terrific amount of criticism aimed at Ed Smart in the Salt Lake > papers, and in the national media as well. He's seen as someone who is > cynically using his daughter's kidnapping for personal gain, as a > publicity hound, and so on. I'm quite astounded at how willing good > Utah Mormons are to judge the man. Let me just say a few=3D20 > things: first, we have absolutely no right to judge his decisions > anyway; second, there was going to be a movie and a book anyway, so why > not cooperate and retain some control of content?; third, the Smarts are > giving most of the money to charity, and fourth, Ed Smart has an agenda, > and has had since this event. He's been pushing for the Amber law. > He's been pushing for changes in how the FBI handles these sorts of > cases. And he wants to provide hope for other families facing similar > tragedies.=3D20 > > I'm just glad his daughter is home and safe. I'm glad Mitchell and > Wanda Barzee are in prison. I'm really happy for Angela Ricci, whose > husband's good name was dragged through the mud the way it was. (SLC > police were so tunnel vision obsessed with Richard Ricci, they ignored > far more plausible potential suspects, and that was very well > portrayed.) And I'm glad the movie was what is was, quiet, > nonsensational, reasonably non-sectarian. And over. > > The Jessica Lynch movie, on the other hand, looked awful, what I saw of > it. But that's another subject altogether. > > Eric Samuelsen > > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] My Web Page Date: 10 Nov 2003 10:54:07 -0700 ___ Jacob ___ | Cool. Any chance that you'll RSS enable it? Please? RSS | Reader is my friend... ___ That's the plan. I have half the python code for that done as well as blog-like comments. Nate was hinting that I do the site he set up once I get it working. Unfortunately my wife has been calling the computer my "mistress" which suggests she's prefer cuddling watching TV rather than my working on the computer reading physics and philosophy. (Although I did put some wedding pictures up finally) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] Story vs words=20 Date: 03 Nov 2003 14:54:19 -0700 [moderator's apologies - this was another message overlooked in the switching of moderators. Sorry for the delay.] Susan M[almrose] "I haven't read it, but I've heard Stephen King wrote a book about bookwriting. Anyone read it? Any good?" I'm sure I won't be the only one to respond to this, but yes, he has written an excellent book called _On Writing_, half memoir about his career, half manual. It's excellent--and the only thing he's written that I've read, but I'm convinced from it that he's an excellent author. I just don't dare open his horror stuff, because I know I'd have nightmares. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 10 Nov 2003 12:42:10 -0600 At 05:27 PM 11/7/03, you wrote: >I know there used to be a "AML Living Room" with an index of >people's pages, but last time I looked at it I don't think it'd been >updated for a long time. The Living Room is defunct. I'm sorry guys! Last updates were well over=20 four years ago. It's still uploaded, technically, but there are no more links to the page anywhere (that I'm aware of). Some people were concerned about security. The LR page was easier to access bios than the archives. The only way to find it now is to know the location. This link might work: http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo/aml/ unless I did delete it and forgot... but I think I just took down the links and LDS Webring linkings. And for the compilation post, my website is here: http://www.alyssastory.com That's actually a "fake ID" that takes you to the sprintmail/Earthlink page above (minus the "aml" part). Easier to remember and type! Linda Adams Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://www.alyssastory.com -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Cathrynlane@cs.com Subject: RE: [AML] Options for our conferences Date: 18 Nov 2003 10:52:44 -0500 I'd love some kind of highlights, or recordings of selected secessions. I used to get tapes of CES conference and I enjoyed hearing a recording of the class. Almost like being there. =20 Speaking of the Writers Conference, I live way too far to come for a day, but my BYU Freshman Daughter heard about it on campus from some other source than me. Knowing of my soft spot and membership in AML she hit me up for the fee (and I was a softy). Her report of the conference was that it was good, but I would have liked it better because, "Mom, everyone was your age." Her very next comment was, "but I sat at a table and talked with with 5 published authors!" She also ate lunch with a lady who had published "tons of stuff". She really liked having an experienced author review her first line. All in all it was worth my $30.=20 Melissa Proffitt wrote: >I think we had a very good turnout for our writers conference, and we're >anticipating another good meeting in a few months with our Annual >Meeting. > >However, we know there are many AML-list subscribers who live too far >away to attend our functions. =A0We would like to know if any of you would >be interested, in the future, in purchasing some kind of recording of >the conferences--either cassette, CD, or DVD. > >Right now this is just a very nebulous idea, so don't dive for your >checkbooks yet. =A0But if you're interested, please let us know what would >be most useful. =A0Writers conference or Annual Meeting (or both)? >Highlights or every session? =A0Which media format is best? > >Thanks, >Melissa Proffitt > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darvell Hunt Subject: [AML] "The 17" LDS films Date: 03 Nov 2003 20:21:12 GMT [moderator's apology: this message was overlooked in the transfer of moderators earlier this month. Sorry for the delay. To begin to answer Darvell's question, go to http://www.ldsfilm.com for complete info, though you might start at his list of LDS Cinema films: http://www.ldsfilm.com/lds_cinema.html] Great writing conference over the weekend in Provo! I enjoyed it very much--probably more so than any other AML event I've attended (and this is about the fifth one so far). I enjoyed it so much probably because I found more lectures this time in which I was personally interested. Anyway, I heard it mentioned during the panel discussion (with Kurt Hale, John Moyer, and Jongiorgi Enos) that there are 17 LDS films. Can someone please list these? I didn't know there were that many. And what criteria were used in placing these films on this list? (Are films like _Orgasmo_ really included on this list, like Kurt Hale joked?) Thanks, Darvell ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Writing from another POV Date: 15 Nov 2003 07:00:16 -0700 I haven't read the book so can't comment on the validity of the female=20 response. But I can admit to being surprised upon learning years ago=20 that many Mormon women would respond to a good looking young man in=20 ways similar to what men do upon seeing a pretty woman to whom they are not married. I had entered adult-hood and the first few years of marriage thinking that unchosen sexual thoughts were the curse of men only, that women were somehow above that. My wife and some of her friends taught me different over the years. I had also been taught only men were "turned-on" by the sight of=20 female nudity, that women don't respond viscerally. I have since=20 learned that this is also an old wives tale. A female friend of ours=20 years ago ultimately divorced her husband because he refused to do his=20 husbandly duty. In my naivete at the time, I couldn't understand how=20 any man could NOT have carnal desires. My point to all this is that maybe we men and womean aren't all that=20 different in every case. What may appear to be out of the normal range=20 of female experience for one or a group of women may be perfectly normal for another group of women. If I've learned anything in my amateur study of the human animal over=20 the years, it is this: If you can imagine it, chances are that some=20 person has done it, or thought it somewhere. If this is true, even the=20 most bizarre take on femaleness or maleness in literature can reflect a=20 certain reality among some subset of humanity, Thom Duncan Annette Lyon wrote: >"I appreciated what she shared even if I disagree with her belief that >men writing from a woman's perspective rarely get it right. There might >be a lot that get it wrong, but there are a goodly share who have >impressed me: WallyLamb was the first who sprang to my mind." > > >I've only read one of his, _She's Come Undone_, and I think he did >remarkably well with the female perspective--with one major exception >that pulled me right out of the story. Without getting graphic, let's >just say he apparently believes an old wive's tale about female >response. If his editor was a woman, shame on her for letting that one >get through. > >Annette Lyon > > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > =20 > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 10 Nov 2003 16:52:54 -0700 On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:43:15 -0700, Eric Samuelsen wrote: >I thought it was quite a well done film, given that it was a made for >TV movie. And there's one last thing I need to say about it. There's >been a terrific amount of criticism aimed at Ed Smart in the Salt Lake >papers, and in the national media as well. He's seen as someone who is >cynically using his daughter's kidnapping for personal gain, as a >publicity hound, and so on. I'm quite astounded at how willing good >Utah Mormons are to judge the man. This after many media outlets made comments like "they're going to make=20 The story no matter what you want, so you might as well do it your way first." The Smart family really was trapped as far as publicity went--either bow out and let someone else sensationalize the story, or take charge and be accused of greed and cynicism. I think Ed Smart made the right decision, above all because it allowed him the greatest degree of protection for his daughter. Melissa Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Nan P. McCulloch" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Sugar Beet promotion Date: 17 Nov 2003 20:19:00 -0700 Kathy, I love the Sugar Beet, but I remember there were about 3 that crossed over the line for me. I don't have time to go back and check the archives to see which ones they were, but if you want to e-mail me privately I will tell you what they referred to. Nan McCulloch ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 12:26 PM > No need to duck from the flames. ;-) > > But, if you are going to claim to "Stand for Something", then why > not state exactly what articles bothered you and why? Instead of > merely stating your opinion that the line of good taste has been > crossed and one can be funny without being dirty. Tell us where > we stumbled into the mists of darkness and how you think we > could correct that. Then we can have a conversation about what > a particular staffer had in mind when they wrote what they did. > > In other words, we can have a discussion about it and learn > something new that either party may not have thought of before. > > Kathy Tyner > Orange County, CA > > > ----- Original Message -----=3D20 > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 11:32 PM > Subject: [AML] Re: Sugar Beet promotion > > > > Sorry if I seem to be a prude, but as to the Sugar Beet coming out in > > print form, my vote is, "Don't bother". > >=3D20 > > I actually used to like it the few times I visited their web site in > the > > past, but several of the latest articles IMHO have crossed the line of > > good taste. > >=3D20 > > I think you can be funny without getting dirty. (Now do I duck from > the > > flames or "Stand for Something"?) > >=3D20 > > Just my opinion, > > Robert Starling > >=3D20 > >=3D20 > > -- > > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Tyner" Subject: Re: [AML] Options for our conferences Date: 17 Nov 2003 19:18:18 -0800 I'd certainly be in favor of recording sessions of both. It just killed me not to be able to come out to this last conference. My main preference would be to record the classes given, probably on cassette. I would like the keynote address as well. I like the way it's handled at Sunstone Symposiums. You get a list of what presentations are taking place and can pick and choose which classes/presentations/roundtable discussions or keynote addresses you'd like to have and pay for each one separately or get some kind of discount for ordering a bulk amount. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 11:51 AM > I think we had a very good turnout for our writers conference, and we're > anticipating another good meeting in a few months with our Annual > Meeting. >=20 > However, we know there are many AML-list subscribers who live too far > away to attend our functions. We would like to know if any of you would > be interested, in the future, in purchasing some kind of recording of > the conferences--either cassette, CD, or DVD. >=20 > Right now this is just a very nebulous idea, so don't dive for your > checkbooks yet. But if you're interested, please let us know what would > be most useful. Writers conference or Annual Meeting (or both)? > Highlights or every session? Which media format is best? >=20 > Thanks, > Melissa Proffitt >=20 >=20 > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Speech Patterns Date: 17 Nov 2003 18:48:15 -0700 On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:09:11 -0700 Barbara Hume writes: > There's also a specific cadence to scripture reading. The voice > goes along in a monotone until the final syllable of a passage, > when it drops down a couple of tones. Not when I read 'em. scott -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Pride and Prejudice Date: 25 Nov 2003 10:57:19 -0700 I was one of the lucky people to get tickets to Saturday's screening and was pleasantly surprised by how good the film was. It has a few moments (especially in the first half) where it could have been edited a bit tighter, and it felt ten or fifteen minutes too long, but overall I loved it and found myself laughing outloud several times. It knocks the socks off Singles Ward. I was also happy to see that, contrary to some reports, the cast wasn't filled with Barbie dolls. Lydia was the only one that really fit that category, but she had to be one since it was part of her character. Kam Heskin was perfectly cast as Lizzy, I think. She is pretty (but not Barbie pretty), with unique features and an intellectual look that fit the part. I liked Orlando Seale as Darcy, but part of it may have been because he so closely resembles Colin Firth. The script was adapted very well from the book, not sticking too close when it would have made things drag, but working in the high points in creative ways. It was great fun. Annette Lyon -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Levi Peterson" Subject: Re: [AML] TOPPING, _Utah Historians . . ._ (SLT) Date: 17 Nov 2003 21:42:47 -0800 Reviewer Martin Naparsteck indicates that Utah historian Gary Topping suggests that fear "kept [Juanita Brooks] from following her materials [in her history of the Mountain Meadows Massacre] to what many would regard as their most convincing interpretation." He writes, "Brooks was reluctant whenever she felt obligated to dissent from official church points of view." It was, in effect, a fear of being disloyal, he argues, that kept her from accusing Brigham Young "even as an accessory after the fact." I have a hard time understanding how Gary could arrive at that conclusion when Juanita writes expressly in her history of the massacre that Brigham Young was informed about the facts of the massacre very early and helped conceal them for many years. Juanita never tried to conceal her dislike for Brigham Young. The only church leader whom she disliked more was David O. McKay, whom she resented for refusing her access to affidavits about the massacre. Levi Peterson Associate editor, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought althlevip@msn.com (425) 427-9642 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eugene Woodbury" Subject: Re: [AML] Review: The Elizabeth Smart Story Date: 25 Nov 2003 11:33:09 -0700 A review centered around this thesis: "Female captivity narratives tend to be more gripping than male narratives because we can accept that they might fall under the control of others; men are somehow expected to escape." http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=3Donline&s=3Donion111903 Captive Audience by Rebecca Onion "Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope, penned by Lois and Ed Smart and featuring a frighteningly monochromatic jacket photo of the Smarts and their six blonde children; and I Am A Soldier, Too: The Jessica Lynch Story, by ex-NYTer Rick Bragg." And a funny comment on the above review: http://iraqnow.blogspot.com/2003_11_01_iraqnow_archive.html#106962263348 308272 Eugene Woodbury -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Nan P. McCulloch" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon speech patterns Date: 25 Nov 2003 13:24:09 -0700 Mormons use lots of repetitious redundancies Nan McCulloch ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 4:00 PM > I took a Semantics class years ago where my professor actually had a=20 > special lecture on Mormon grammar and their speech habits. One typical=20 > characteristic is the need for Mormons to balance their nouns out and=20 > verbs out with dual witnesses. An example is during prayers, to pray=20 > for "no harm and danger", "love and charity" "He is kind AND generous" > > It can never be just one adjective for the average Mormon. > > > On Wednesday, November 19, 2003, at 07:29 AM, JanaRiess@aol.com wrote: > > > In a message dated 11/17/03 4:12:18 PM,=3D20 > > owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com writes: > > > >> There are specifically Mormon speech patterns? What are they? > >> > >> ~Jamie Laulusa > >> > > > > This is Utah, not just Mormon, but how about: > > > > "I fill of the Spirit"? > > > > Fillings, nothing more than fillings . . . . > > Jana Riess > > > > > > > > > > -- > > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Shelly Johnson-Choong" Subject: Re: [AML] My Web Page Date: 18 Nov 2003 07:29:57 -0800 Susan Malmrose wrote in part: > Who else has a webpage? Can we get a compilation post of everyone's > URL's if they want to share them? I've got one. It's a lot of work, but a lot of fun. http://www.shellyjohnsonchoong.com Shelly (Johnson-Choong) -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Samuel Brown Subject: [AML] Mormon Speech Patterns Date: 25 Nov 2003 14:12:19 -0500 [Moderator's comment: I think we'll all "fill" better about this linguistic clarification :)] as a former linguist i can speak to this. it's actually called "Wasatch Front vowel reduction" and has been well described in the linguistics literature. it's just a regional variation, very common, much like the minnesotan or the canadian vowels. bc the wasatch front is largely Mormon, it's associated with them, but it's not specific to them. Thus we have doctors "hill" ing their patients, eating "mills" at lunchtime, and so forth. What's most interesting is when explants (guilty) over-correct. =20 I have caught myself climbing up a "heal" in my attempt to distinguish myself from my linguistic roots. the bottom line (linguistically speaking) is that there is no relevant difference between the dialectal pronunciations, other than as tags of sociocultural differences. as for the doubling of adjectives, there's good scriptural basis for that, as the Hebrews (and the New Testament writers) frequently used doublets and triplets for emphasis. That's one of the points of OT poetry that has so fascinated commentators: rather than use methods (rhyme/rhythm) that are lost in translation, the Hebrew sacred poets used patterns that are harder to lose in translation. Bringing me back to my first point, which was... I'm not sure. ciao. --=20 Samuel Brown, MD Massachusetts General Hospital -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Speech Patterns -=3D20 Date: 17 Nov 2003 19:53:57 -0700 On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:09:11 -0700, Barbara Hume wrote: >At 05:51 PM 11/14/03 -0500, you wrote: >There's also a specific cadence to scripture reading. The voice >goes along in a monotone until the final syllable of a passage, >when it drops down a couple of tones. Then it starts over. I've been experimenting with this in my ward for the last three years. When asked to read, I slow down, use structurally appropriate emphasis and even alter my tone very slightly in dialog. I began doing so mainly to engage my own interest, but I've noticed a bit of change in others now, too. It's much more interesting now that people don't seem to be racing along as fast as they can in that dreadful monotone. Jacob Proffitt -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kathy Tyner" Subject: Re: [AML] Women in LDS Film, Not Pretty Enough: Part Three Date: 25 Nov 2003 11:20:45 -0800 Sounds like we have enough interactions to do:=20 "The Six Degrees of Tayva Patch", (the Mormon version of "The Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon"). And Thom, I'm sure a lot of us on this list would line up to do a love scene with you in one of your plays-for the sake of art, of course! ;-) Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 8:56 PM > >>(Like how I tried to delicately > >>side-step the age issue?!) I'd do a love scene with her no problem. > > > >I have. Neener, neener, neener. >=20 > And Tayva Patch has pulled my hair. Granted, it was a wig when she was > the Baker's Wife and I was Rapunzel, but still. It's my meager claim to > fame. :) >=20 > Annette Lyon >=20 >=20 > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Re: Harry Potter - from Stepen King's POV Date: 26 Nov 2003 12:07:41 -0600 [MOD: My apologies that this post apparently got lost in a black=20 hole--almost certainly my fault, as things were shifted around during the=20 transition between moderators. --Jonathan Langford.] ArialTime out folks: I hear Stephen King's name used authoritatively with reference to J. K. Rowling's inability to write an acceptable sentence or a book for that matter. So I am sending this post with quotes from Stephen King's review of "The Order of the Phoenix." Quoting his book on writing is one thing, but quoting it to refute the writing ability of J. K. Rowling whom he has openly praised simply does not wash. __________________________________________ =20 ArialPotter Gold A review of "The Order of the Phoenix" By Stephen King =20 King takes a shining to J.K. Rowling's delightfully dark Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix here, in the spirit of the exam motif, are some questions (and answers) of my own. The first is the most important...and may, in the end, be only one that matters in what is probably the most review-proof book to come along since a little best-seller called the Bible. 1. Is Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix as good as the other Harry Potter books? No. This one is actually quite a bit better. The tone is darker, and this has the unexpected =96=96 but very pleasing =96=96 effect of making= Rowling's wit and playful black humor shine all the brighter. Where but in the world of Jo Rowling would one find deadly supernatural beings and their frightening familiars existing side by side with empty gloves that twiddle their thumbs impatiently, not to mention enchanted interdepartmental memos that fly from floor to floor in the Ministry of Magic as paper airplanes? =20 2. Are there spoilers in this review? Spoilers from a novelist who thinks the best dust-jacket flap copy ever written was "[Gore Vidal's] Duluth tears the lid off Dallas"? Perish the thought! But even if there were spoilers, would it matter? I'm betting that by the time this piece sees print, 90 percent of the world's Potter maniacs will have finished the novel and will be starting their letters to Ms. Rowling asking when volume 6 will be ready. 3. You say this one's better than The Prisoner of Azkaban, better than The Goblet of Fire, is there still room for improvement? Heavens, yes. In terms of Ms. Rowling's imagination =96=96 which should be insured by Lloyd's of London (or perhaps the Incubus Insurance Company) for the 2 or 3 billion dollars it will ultimately be worth over the span of her creative liftime, which should be long =96=96 she is now at the absolute top of her game. As a writer, however, she is often careless (characters never just put on their clothes; they always get "dressed at top speed") and oddly, almost sweetly, insecure. The part of speech that indicates insecurity ("Did you really hear me? Do you really understand me?") is the adverb, and Ms. Rowling seems to have never met one she didn't like, especially when it comes to dialogue attribution. Harry's godfather, Sirius, speaks "exasperatedly"; Mrs. Weasley (mother of Harry's best friend, Ron) speaks "sharply"; Tonks (a clumsy which with punked-up, particolor hair) speaks "earnestly." As for Harry himself, he speaks quietly, automatically, nervously, slowly, and often =96=96 given his current case of raving adolescence =96=96 ANGRILY. These minor flaws in diction are endearing rather than annoying; they are the logical side effect of a natural storyteller who is obviously bursting with crazily vivid ideas and having the time of her life. Yet Ms. Rowling could do better, and for the money, probably should. In any case, there's no need for all those adverbs (he said firmly), which pile up at the rate of 8 or 10 a page (over 870 pages, that comes to almost a novella's length of -ly words). Because, really =96=96 we hear, we understand, we enjoy. If the sales figures show nothing else, they show that. And if by the end of chapter 3 we don't know that Harry Potter is one utterly, completely, and pervasively angry young man, we haven't been paying attention. Arial*** Skip some remarks about whether or not such dark books are good for young readers, and what the best thing about the book is =20 -- To the first King says, yes they are, unless it gives them nightmares. --To the second, King thinks, it is the dark villan -Umbridge, with her girlish voice, toadlike face, and clutching, stubby fingers, is the greatest make-believe villain to come along since Hannibal Lecter. *** 6. Last, but not least, how good are these books? How good are they, really? One can only guess...assuming, that is, one doesn't have access to Dumbledore's wonderful Pensieve Glass. My own feeling is that they are much better than Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy, which is their only contemporary competitor. Will kids (and adults as well) still be wild about Harry 100 years from now, or 200? My best guess is that he will indeed stand time's test and wind up on a shelf where only the best are kept; I think Harry will take his place with Alice, Huck, Frodo, and Dorothy, and this is one series not just for the decade, but for the ages. =20 Arial(Stephen King's remarks were cut and pasted from: <http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D3a2f8b89.0307052235.67= 41af29%40posting.google.com ) =20 ArialBill Willson, writer <http://www.iwillwriteit.com <http://www.latterdaybard.com =20 ArialHere's a great place for LDS artists=20 to show and sell their work.=20 <http://www.minutemall.com CHECK IT OUT! =20 -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Date: 26 Nov 2003 11:41:12 -0700 [66.1.180.220]) by mimis.host4u.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9NGXUu17920 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:33:30 -0500 Message-ID: <3F980318.9050106@wwno.com> Organization: Worlds Without Number User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax; PROMO) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list [MOD: Apologies for the looong delay in posting this, which is entirely my fault. --Jonathan Langford, moderator-in-hiding. Note, by the way, that whatever shows up as the source of this, it was ACTUALLY written by D. Michael Martindale.] Eric Samuelson wrote: > What I think we need is something akin to the Dogme 95 manifesto. Here > is the 'Vow of Chastity' taken by the Dogme 95 filmmakers. I've > included my own comments and suggestions for applications for LDS > filmmakers. > The reasons for Dogme were what they called a 'technological > revolution' which in their opinion was killing film. Often, when humans react to an extreme condition, they go too far to the other extreme. To me, that describes Dogme. Their rules of "natural" filmmaking are as disruptive to effective storytelling as any technological revolution going on in Hollywood. >1. Shooting must be done on location. Props and sets must not be >brought in (if a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location >must be chosen where this prop is to be found). A massive number of stories would be either prohibitively expensive or physically impossible to film following this rule. Would anyone want to see a Dogme adaptation of "Lord of the Rings"? Should Kubrick have gone on location to Jupiter to film "2001"? > Certainly God's Army and Brigham City followed this rule, as did In > the Company of Men. It suggests a certain kind of realism. While using real locations can bring realism to film, I know for a fact that God's Army and Brigham City did not use existing props. Using real locations is a semi-reasonable rule. Bringing no props in is idiocy. >2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice >versa. > >(Music must not be used unless it occurs where the scene is being >shot). It's true that Hollywood films have very controlled sound tracks, which depict natural sound in a very unnatural way. Real sound is very noisy in the background. But not only would that be annoying in every film, it's not how we hear natural sound. We filter out all the background noise. Film sound tracks cannot do that, except by artificially removing it. Hollywood sound tracks are definitely artifical, not natural, sound, but why is that a bad thing? > Although I don't think this rule needs to be rigorously followed by > our filmmakers, I would love to see us getting away from perhaps our > worst cliche, the swelling music underneath backlit long shots. I agree with your assessment of use of music here, but to equate that with rule #2 is a nonsequiter. Rule #2 merely bans it. >3. The camera must be hand-held. Any movement or immobility attainable >in the hand is permitted. This rule would exile my wife from all films. She became physically ill from watching "Blair Witch," and not becauseof its artistic quality. The constantly wiggling image gave her motion sickness. Please, give me a camera on a tripod as the default! >4. The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable. (If >there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a >single lamp be attached to the camera). > > >5. Optical work and filters are forbidden. Still photographers would guffaw at these rules. They use artificial light and redirect or block natural light and use filters to massage colors all the time. They understand that film does not record images in the same way the human eye sees them, therefore "natural" unmassaged images will look unnatural on film. Optical work is essential for telling many kinds of stories. It's true that movies where the effects are there for their own sake and not for the story. But to ban all effects is a dumb way to solve that problem. >6. The film must not contain superficial action. (Murders, weapons, >etc. must not occur.) This is just politically correct nonsense. > By losing a focus on murder and crime, the Dogme guys have freed > themselves to explore fundamental religious questions. Miracles, > actual religious miracles, are NOT forbidden. The only reason they needed to "free" themselves in the first place is the artifical bias among filmmakers that religious questions and miracles are politically incorrect topics for film. They don't need this pointless rule to free them. They can free themselves simply by rejecting the bias. >7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden. (That is to say >that the film takes place here and now.) This may be the most arrogant rule of all. How many legitimate stories are banned by this rule! >8. Genre movies are not acceptable. Oops! This may be the most arrogant rule. >9. The film format must be Academy 35 mm. I don't know why this rule exists, so it's hard for me to comment on it, other than to wonder why we need to canonize any particular film stock. >10. The director must not be credited. While I agree that the "auteur" philosophy of filmmaking that says the film IS the director's is invalid, to refuse any credit to the director is an example of going to the other extreme. I acknowledge the purpose behind Dogme as legitimate, but I think Dogme is as destructive a "cure" as the original disease. It kills films with an anti-technological revolution. > I would add three new rules, and perhaps cut or amend rules 2, 3 and > 9. I would take the sound principles Dogme tries to address, internalize them, and toss the rules. For all time, humanity has suffered under the oppressive hands of Pharisees (even in modern times, even within the latter-day Church). I grow weary of dealing with them. > My rules: 1) I will cast people who look like real people. > 2) I will refrain from preaching. These come across more like sound principles than rules. > 3) At no time in the publicity process will the cost of the film be > mentioned. We're creating art. How much art costs is irrelevant. It's relevant to investors and to other filmmakers, who had better learn the business side of filmmaking if they want to be able to keep making films (just ask Jongiorgi). Not everyone can ply their art under the protective nurturing of a university that shields them from the economic realities of life. > Here's the final part of the Dogme manifesto: > > Furthermore I swear as a director to refrain from personal taste! I am > no longer an artist. Is there any other form of art where the practitioners would think this is a good idea? > I swear to refrain from creating a "work", as I > regard the instant as more important than the whole. That sounds like a recipe for a bad film. The filmmaker had better regard the whole as at least as significant as any of its parts, or only dumb luck can save him from a disaster. Of course, the director may delude himself into believing he's not regarding the whole, while his subconscious intuitively looks after the whole for him. But that's not quite the same thing, is it. > My supreme goal is to force > the truth out of my characters and settings. I swear to do so by all > the means available and at the cost of any good taste and any > aesthetic considerations. This is pure disingenuousness. The rules of Dogme _ban_ many of the means available to accomplish this "supreme goal." Dogme is the plan of Satan applied to filmmaking: "I don't trust myself to be able to implement correct principles of storytelling in film, so I want externally imposed rules to do the policing for me." >Thus I make my VOW OF CHASTITY." This is not a vow of chastity. It's a vow of relinquishment of artistic responsibility. Dogme can be useful if used in the proper way. That would be as an educational experiment to see what the filmmaker can do under such limitations, as a way of learning to slough off the ill effects of Hollywood's technological revolution. But when the laboratory experiments are over and it's time to enact some real filmmaking, Dogme is a cure that is as destructive as the disease it claims to treat. > What I think is, we've created this movement without any kind of > philosophical or theoretical underpinning, and so we're creeping > rapidly towards a mini-Hollywood model. And that seems to me most > unfortunate. I agree with your assessment here, but I think using Dogme as a starting point for an LDS cinematic model is a bad idea. The model should be a loyalty to the story and to truth. All else should be subserviant to that, including the artificially "natural" rules of Dogme. -- 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: Re: [AML] Harry Potter Date: 26 Nov 2003 16:15:41 -0600 [MOD: My apologies for this post not making it out back when it was originally written, nigh on six weeks (!) ago. --Jonathan Langford] Jacob wins yet another well deserved *WELL SAID!* award. I sent the first one privately, but he is getting so good at it I think he deserves list-wide recognition. Thank you Jacob! I also get weary personal opinions being offered as the Gospel of the Muse. When a simple, *I didn't like it for this reason* would serve the purpose. We all assume what is posted on AML is the poster's own opinion, but IMHO some seem to be trying to establish unwanted or unnecessary standards and restrictions on the craft of writing. This kind of criticism is within reasonable expectations for the responsibility of an English Professor in an English 1010 class, however; I think it is inappropriate criticism for an author of five going on seven best sellers whose residuals for one book alone was over $100 million. I've always said opinions are like belly buttons, we all have them, and each one is unique. What a shame it would be if all the medical schools in the country refused to graduate their obstetricians until they all could tie exactly the same umbilical knot with the same resultant healed mark. Regards, Bill Willson -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature