From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #448 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Tuesday, September 11 2001 Volume 01 : Number 448 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:29:17 -0500 From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Moderator Message: Problems Yesterday Folks, Apologies for the List being down yesterday, due to problems with my email server. There's a large backlog; I'll do my best to work through it today. (This message won't count toward the total for AML-List or AML-Mag.) Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:06:22 -0700 From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: [AML] Product Placement in Writing This isn't exactly *Mormon* literature, but it is news from the world of publishing that may merit notice. Fay Weldon has just published a novel whose title I can't recall right now, but the title contains the name of a famous jewelry store. According to news reports, the book speaks glowingly about the store, using names of actual people who work there. So far, okay. But it turns out the store paid her a large sum of money for "product placement" -- a technique long used in movies and other media. But this is the first time I've heard of "product placement" in the world of literature. Do you all find this an alarming development? Or is it just another trend to be expected in a consumerist economy? [Jeff Needle] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:24:06 -0600 From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: [AML] CARD, _Saints_ (was: Polygamy) On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:12:16 GMT cgileadi@emerytelcom.net writes: > The difference between _The Giant Joshua_ and _Saints_ is that > _Joshua_ is quite biographical, based on the author's great- > grandfather, I believe, while _Saints_ is totally made up. A story > well-told, but fiction. _Saints_ is probably just as biographical as _The Giant Joshua_ actually. Scott had access through his father-in-law, who was Church historian for awhile to quite a bit of the Church archives. When, in the book, O. Kirkham (O. Card) says that he got hold of Dinah's journal and photocopied the whole thing, my supposition is (supposition because I have never asked Scott outright) that this is exactly what Scott did with Eliza R. Snow's journal. In fact I *did* hear Scott mention on one occasion that everything that happened in that book did actually happen ... to someone. Most of the characters (including Dinah) are composites. Scott said that every scene came from some kind of source material that he fictionalized with dialogue and inner monologue. All but two or three scenes he said, that he did invent from whole cloth. J. Scott Bronson -- Member of Playwrights Circle - ------------------------------------------------------------------ "The sun, with all those planets revolving around it and dependent upon it, can still ripen a bunch of grapes as if it had nothing else in the universe to do." Galileo - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:33:40 -0500 From: "jana" (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Covenant Books for Review Hi folks! Here's a list of books up for review. Please take a look at www.xmission.com/`aml/reviews/guidelines.html to learn more about our review program. If you'd like to be a reviewer, send an email to me jana@enivri.com with the reasons why you're requesting that particular title. If you are interested in more than one book, please send a piroritized list. If your first choice book isn't available, I'll slate you for your 2nd or 3rd choice. Please keep in mind that reviews are due within one month of receiveing the book and all reviews are considered for publication in Irreantum. Thanks! Jana AML-List Review Editor Bridge to Forever, Rachel Ann Nunes (Softcover) Mickelle Hansen has found a dream come true in handsome widower Damon Wolfe. He is considerate, kind, active in the Church, and even wealthy-everything she could possibly want in a husband. His wonderful children, Tanner and Belle, are icing on the cake. But could Mickelle be getting involved too soon after her husband's death? Her teenage son Bryan definitely thinks so. A near tragedy causes Mickelle to reevaluate her relationship with Damon. Despite all he has to offer, Damon cannot guarantee her the one thing she desires most. But by walking away is she saving herself pain . . or losing the kind of love that comes only once in a lifetime? Charming Colton Scofield is also fighting for Mickelle's attention. He is there when she needs someone the most, ready to share the secrets of his mysterious past. But Colton is not all that he seems, and soon the very lives of those Mickelle loves hang in the balance. An intensely romantic journey of faith, love, and hope. Join Mickelle as she crosses the Bridge to Forever. Hearts in Hiding, Betsy Brannon Green (Softcover) Devastation, betrayal, self-pity, anger-none of these words do any justice to the tangle of emotions Kate Singleton is experiencing. Married just over a year, with a baby on the way, Kate learns that her husband, an FBI agent, is dead. To top it off, the same people who murdered her husband have a contract on her head. With the help of the FBI, Kate flees with little more than the clothes on her back. And in no time at all, they provide her with new clothes, a new home, a new name, and . . . a new husband. But this is only the beginning of Kate's adventure. Before it's through, there will be a kidnapping, true love, and enough suspense to keep any reader turning pages long after bedtime. Hearts in Hiding is an action-packed, romantic first novel by gifted author Betsy Brannon Green. Race Against Time, Willard Boyd Gardner (Softcover) Life seems simple enough for Owen Richards. He likes it simple. Twenty-nine, single, a steady girlfriend, and unburdened by religion, Owen enjoys his work as an elite police officer. Then his best friend is killed during a dangerous hostage rescue. Guilt-ridden, irritable, and questioning his own lack of beliefs, Owen agrees to do a favor for a family friend, hoping to get his mind off of his troubles. The favor turns out to be driving Julianna McCray, an intelligent, gorgeous, LDS woman to Missouri. Julianna's companionship makes for the perfect distraction. But just when Owen's life seems to be making sense again, he steps unwittingly back into history. The year is 1838, and Owen helps a distressed frontier woman save her brother from a group of anti-Mormons and thrusts himself into the middle of the vicious persecution by the Missouri mobs. It will take all of Owen's training, discipline-and some help from above-to stay alive, defend a newfound truth, and return to the woman he . . . loves. Summaries not available for: Cutting Edge by Jeffrey S. Savage (suspense/thriller) Where the Heart Leads by Anita Stansfield (romance) The Heart Only Knows by Kerry Blair (romance) - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 11:05:28 -0600 From: MGA Subject: Re: [AML] Fw: MN Newsweek Cover Takes Flawed, Skeptical Look at LDS Church: Kent Larsen 3Sep01 US NY NYC N1 [snip] > Probably the most glaring error is Woodward's claim that "not since the > ancient Olympiads ... have the Games been staged in a locale so thoroughly > saturated by a single religion." In fact, the 1960 Olympics were held in > Rome, which by most definitions is "saturated" by the Catholic Church. > Woodward's article also manages to misstate the title of the Church's recent > film, "The Testaments: One Fold and One Shepherd," err in the name of LDS > Church President Wilford Woodruff and somehow indicate that Mormons call the > rarely-mentioned spouse of Heavenly Father, "the Mother." > Even though Vatican City is in Rome, Rome was not founded as the capital of a theocracy. Salt Lake City, alone among all US capitals, holds that distinction. That is why it was a 45 year struggle for Utah to win statehood. > More significant are some of the article's weaker arguments. Woodward > suggests that the Church changed the film it shows in the Joseph Smith > Memorial Building from "Legacy" to "The Testaments" as part of the Church's > attempt to change its image, which seems unlikely to LDS Church members > given that many of the changes in image occurred before 1990, when Legacy > was introduced. He also claims that rhetoric in General Conference changed, > but fails to cite any study or give enough detail to make the claim > convincing. > I left the Church in 1982. I returned in 1994. Woodward has published the first serious mainstream article that I have read that focuses on the very real, deliberate and important changes that the Church has made in it's focus on Christ. The artwork and imagery that the Church uses has become increasingly like that of evangelical Protestants. I think that many who stay active in the Church, tend to accept changes as they come, and tend to forget that things were ever any other way. But having been out of the Church and LDS culture for over a decade, I felt as if I had rejoined what was in many ways a very different church from the one I had left in the early 1980's. I think Woodward has done a very good job of reporting on this. And I think his article is VERY FAVORABLE TO THE CHURCH. I can't imagine how anyone could distort what he has written as being negative. I appreciate Woodward's touching upon the use of art in Church magazines, publications, films and buildings. One can never underestimate the profound effect that imagery has on a culture or a religion. It is obvious to me (coming from an evangelical Protestant background) that the art employed by the Church, and the manner in which it is presented, is very evangelical protestant in its focus--and in its execution. (More is the pity on the latter!) One example of this major shift is the way the Church has advertised THE HILL CUMORAH PAGEANT since 1998. Before that time, advertisements in New York State emphasized the pageant's spectacle and lush theatricality. Beginning in 1998, however, a new slogan was used: "Come feel the Savior's Love." A photo of an actor dressed as Christ embracing a child in an ancient Native American costume was printed above this new slogan on all the advertising materials. Interestingly enough (but not surprisingly to me) attendance has dropped slightly since the new slogan came into use. This blatant appeal to mainline Christians is the cause, I believe. The slogan presupposes that the majority of the public has a predisposition toward traditional Christianity. Statistics prove just the opposite. Whereas early advertising appealed to a broad cultural interest in entertainment and spectacle, the new slogan appeals only to those who already have a belief in Christ, who already relate to traditional Christian icons, and who are not seeking entertainment (or even instruction) but who are seeking emotional validation of already-held religious beliefs. In short, the pageants slogan and logos now "preach to the choir." As one of the pageant's other directors said to me when we discussed this in 1999, "they [those who created this marketing campaign] seem to be assuming that EVERYONE salivates whenever they hear the word 'Jesus.'" There are many who might be open to the Gospel, but (like many Americans) are turned off by the commercialization of religion and by, what I think, is a "TV Evangelist"-feel to the current pageant advertising. But this advertising is consistent with the current trend in the Church's focusing on Christ. > Other dubious arguments include a suggestion that Mormons "help other > Mormons," which while true probably does not account for the rise of > Marriott and Huntsman as Woodward suggests, and isn't as extensive as many > other religions and ethnic groups. Similarly, Woodward's suggestion that the > LDS Church is the 'only' church structured like a corporation (i.e., with a > centralized hierarchy and finances) implies that he has looked at all other > major denominations to make that conclusion. > Woodward HAS looked at all other major denominations. He has been the religion editor at NEWSWEEK for at least the last 25 years. I read NEWSWEEK every week, particularly for his reporting on religion. I think he is the most accurate, the most understanding and the most sympathetic writer covering religion in the US media today. Again, I have to say that I am dumbfounded that you seem to think he is attacking the Church. In the mid and late 1970's when the media whole-heartedly attacked the Church for it's stand on the ERA (even PEOPLE magazine and Erma Bombeck joined in on the attack), Woodward wrote an EXCELLENT article in the Church's defense--explaining in detail the Church's theology of a Heavenly Mother and Eternal Marriage. Woodward completely defused any charge that the Church "hated women"--which was the standard cry in the media at that time. > But in the end, these errors weaken, but don't refute the article's main > point. Mormon readers may find the article's skeptical tone more troubling, > but given the approaching Olympics, more skeptical articles, such as the > coming New Yorker article, are sure to follow. > > In closing, here is one devout Latter-day Saint with an unshakeable testimony who found nothing at all either TROUBLING or SKEPTICAL in the article. On the contrary, I think members should write, email, telephone Woodward and NEWSWEEK en masse and thank them for the great publicity. And if you don't think this story was positive, wait until NEWSWEEK prints the letters from anti-Mormons in a few weeks who are probably angry that the magazine gave such a positive view of the Church. ROB. LAUER - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 11:32:26 -0600 From: "Barbara Jones" Subject: [AML] Re: [AML-Mag] Pioneer Trek Reenactment I had heard about it, but also heard over the weekend that it's likely to = be canceled because they couldn't come up with sufficient funding. We'll = see. :) - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:52:36 -0600 From: "Ethan Skarstedt" Subject: RE: [AML] An Iconography of Our Own Scott Parkin wrote: >In a visual medium (like a photograph or album cover) the only cues=20 >you have to create a sense of difference is the outward appearance.=20 >Short of a caption beneath each picture ("This is the good one" and=20 >"This is the bad one") how else might the illustrator have shown a=20 >quickly understood differentiation between a good choice and a poor=20 >one? I hasten to point out that a central point to my comment was that it was the *same girl* in different clothes. I take that as evidence that the artist went out of his/her way to reduce the difference between the two to clothing, nothing else. Had the artist used different models for "good" and "bad" I would have had no room to object since, as others have pointed out, our outward appearance does give some indication of our inward selves. Using the same costumes but different models would also have made the "good" "bad" differentiation immediately apparent without implying that the clothes make the man, or girl, as it were. >The whole point of iconic representations is that they're gross=20 >simplifications of larger concepts. Some of us look at the simplistic=20 >rendering and think, "Ah--one is good and the other is bad; OK, I get=20 >it" and we walk away. The image doesn't bear up under further=20 >scrutiny because it was never intended to. My objection to the picture was that it seemed to be a gross simplification of the idea that clothing is acceptable as a sole criteria upon which to make character judgments rather than a gross simplification of the idea that one must choose one's friends carefully. . . . >As so many people on this list have suggested, let's cut each other a=20 >little more slack and assume good intent rather than ill from our=20 >artists. In this case I think a little charity is a good thing. You can assume good intent on the part of an artist and still hold the opinion that he/she is operating on assumptions you don't agree with. I would even go so far as to suggest that some artists with good intent are operating on assumptions that are just plain wrong. In those cases I believe that it is necessary to point out the fallacy. Robert Heinlein once said that he felt it was his duty to heap scorn on inexcusably silly ideas. While I try to avoid heaping scorn I think the basic idea is valid. Silly ideas, whether they be in art, literature or in a classroom (spiritual or secular) must not be allowed to pass unchallenged (as all of us on this list so obviously fervently believe). Of course what I would consider a silly idea may not be considered such by others. But, since I only have access to my own head, I tilt at the windmills I can see. [Ethan Skarstedt] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:03:26 -0600 From: Terry L Jeffress Subject: Re: [AML] B. Weston ROOK, _The Junction_ (Review) On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:18:06PM +0000, R Racer wrote: > I guess I should stop being so lazy and write a review of "A Shadow > From the Past" for the list... someday.) You should write a review of both SHADOW and JUNCTION. Just because someone has already review a book doesn't excuse you from writing a review as well. I find that I come to respect the opinion of some reviewers more than others. I respect the opinion of reviewers when I can make a reasonably sure prediction about how I will like a work based on the reviewer's opinion. When reading a review about a book I have not read, I like to read the reviewer's comments on a work that I have read to get an idea of how our ideas either mesh or butt heads. So for the benefit of the entire AML community, please post reviews of the LDS related books you read. OK, so as the AML-List Reviews Archive, I might have a slight bias, but I really do believe that community efforts can produce great works. Look at the Internet Movie Database [1], it started as a collection of data posted by movie fans and has expanded to the most comprehensive collection of movie information on the planet. [1] http://www.imdb.com [MOD: Amen! And to do my part in that, I'm planning, over the next year or so, to try to write and post reviews for as many LDS lit titles from my library as I can find the time for--whether or not they've been reviewed on the List already, and whether or not they're recent publications, old classics, or whatever. I encourage everyone else to do the same!] - -- Terry L Jeffress | Where is human nature so weak as in the | bookstore? -- Henry Ward Beecher - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 15:21:00 -0600 From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] An Iconography of Our Own Tracie Laulusa wrote: "So, if you are designing cover art for an LDS youth tape how do you = convey light vs dark, good and bad choices, or what ever the tape is = trying to convey? (I've never listened to the tape) Dark clothes could = be very symbolic of spiritual darkness or worldly evil without the artist = trying to convey any statement about judging by outward appearances. The = artist has this one picture to convey a thought or idea that is often = abstract." I think that the issue is that an image such as the one described here = (and often featured in church material) isn't a very interesting way to = portray spiritual darkness. It uses a kind of shorthand that doesn't take = much thought or consideration. It also creates (in trying to communicate = quickly and broadly) a false standard. In fact, sometimes pretty girls in = pink sweaters are sometimes just as spiritually dark as anyone else. But = for the ease of the illustrator, we'll go to the stereotype and call it = good. This last point is kind of obvious. The problem, however, is that people = take this imagery seriously. They live by it, and tend to make real-life = decisions based on the training they receive from the images they find in = church publications and so forth. I think that people everywhere are essentially lazy when it comes to = having to interpret things. They generally want clear messages so they = can make quick distinctions and move on. I think people want this in = their art and literature as well in a lot of cases. The world is obviously more complicated, but LDS art and literature is not = always reflective of these complications. It's not limited to LDS people, = but I think we're particularly susceptible to it. The other day I was doing laundry and the PAX network was on in the = laundromat. The announcer was bragging that PAX was a place to find = entertainment free of explicit language, sex, and violence, then they went = on to air an episode of Bonanza. I stood there folding brassieres and = blouses, thinking that the American West was nothing at all like Bonanza: = full of explicit violence, sex, and language. So what PAX was advertizing was a false version of something in order to = make it palatable to people. In other words, they were purveying lies. = At that point I started wondering why people wanted clean lies over dirty = truth. I bring this up because I sense the same thing coming from a lot of LDS = readers/audiences, who are more interested in avoiding evil than seeking = truth. They want a simple means of making distinctions, which I feel often = results in "simple" (and I mean this pejoratively) art and literature such = as the pink sweaters and leather jackets we've been discussing. - -- Todd Robert Petersen - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 14:17:30 -0600 From: "Tyler Moulton" Subject: Re: [AML] An Iconography of Our Own Ethan Skarstedt wrote: >In one she was wearing a pink sweater with a white shirt >underneath buttoned all the way to the neck, had a pink hair thing >holding her hair back and was holding school books. In the other, the >hair thing was black, she had a dark colored jacket on and was holding a >purse. > >Perceived message? Judge others by their outward appearance. Apparently >this girl was either an acceptable friend or not according to how she >dressed. Others have already given adequate response to this, but to step back a = bit, how can we possibly consider this iconography peculiarly Mormon? = Couldn't this practically describe the movie poster for Grease? We'd have = to put John Travolta in the black jacket, but as iconography, this is = obviously part of the larger culture--not Mormonism. Tyler - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:23:06 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Suspicion of Art - ---Original Message From: Amelia Parkin > this reminded me of the thread on _Testaments_ that was very > active earlier > this summer. I will begin with the statement that I didn't > follow that > thread very closely because I had not yet seen the movie. I > have seen it > now. Anyway, what I want to say is this: I agree with > Jacob. We certainly > should not "turn off our (hopefully) good judgment" simply > because someone > has labeled something art. We should employ discernment and judgment > whenever we approach anything. I would hope, however, that we also > recognize the necessity of exercising that same judgment when > we approach a > representation that has been labeled "gospel" or "church > sponsored". simply > because a film or a painting or a story comes from a church > source does not > mean it is inherently more trustworthy than other sources. > unfortunately, > while most of the Mormons I know are all too eager to > exercise judgment > regarding art of the world, they are every bit as eager to embrace > *anything* labeled Mormon, Gospel, Church. Good point. I always cringe when I read about some scam that managed to milk millions from members in Utah because some bishop was involved. Jacob - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:38:36 -0600 From: rwilliams Subject: RE: [AML] Polygamy >> "He opposed >> Smoot over the issue of Celestial marriage." That particular >> phrase stopped >> me. Celestial marriage. Meaning plural. Well, let's get >> Gene England back to >> address the issue. He was the only one who could comfort my >> mother when she >> asked me what I thought about polygamy. I shared his essay >> on the subject with >> her. It actually helped. And it is a persuasive piece, Speaking of Gene's article on polygamy, I wonder if anyone can help me identify one of his sources. I don't have my Dialogues with me right now (in fact, all of my books are packed in boxes in a garage until I move to Irvine later this month), but I believe his essay on polygamy was published in Winter 1987 (the pink one), and was entitled something like "On Fidelity, Polygamy, and Celestial Marriage." I remember reading that article, and being quite impressed, even "converted," to his ideas on polygamy. They were certainly more acceptable ideas than, say, John Stewart's misogynist hogwash published in the sixties ("Plural marriage is the pattern of marriage most natural, for physically and mentally the man is polygamous, the woman monogamous, for thus they were created by God"). Anyway, at one point in Gene's essay he introduces the idea that the multiple sealings in the temple do not necessarily guarantee that those same marriages will continue in the celestial kingdom--that just because one man is sealed to several wives it does not mean he will have all of those wives in the celestial kingdom. As evidence, he cites an instance where some temple workers were doing some work for a deceased woman who had been married and widowed several times. They came to President McKay, wondering which of the several husbands they should seal her to. His answer, as I remember it in the essay, was to seal her to ALL of them, and that they would somehow "work it out" after this life. My question is this: what is Gene's source on this story? I also remember him alluding to it in class when he was my professor at BYU, though I can't figure out what his source is. Is there anyone that can help on this? - --John - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 15:26:16 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Polygamy Tony Markham wrote: > I find it interesting and a bit revealing that during the current discussion on > polygamy the main participants have been women who are fairly unanimous in feeling > repulsed by the whole idea (except for one who wrote that once, maybe, in an > isolated fit of compassion, she could get an inkling of how it might work), while > the men on the list read on with nary an evaluative comment. Okay, I'll provide one. Anyone who deigns to write a story of the future in which polygamy is brought back has to figure out a way to "inactivate" the currently popular Proclamation on the Family which specifically states that marriage is between one man and one woman. I read that as about an offical repudiation of the doctrine as one could expect. The stories that Konnie and Barbara envision will have to deal with that reality to make believable speculative fiction. Thom - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:27:28 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Polygamy - ---Original Message From: Tony Markham > I find it interesting and a bit revealing that during the > current discussion on polygamy the main participants have > been women who are fairly unanimous in feeling repulsed by > the whole idea (except for one who wrote that once, maybe, in > an isolated fit of compassion, she could get an inkling of > how it might work), while the men on the list read on with > nary an evaluative comment. > > What a surprise. Well, don't hold back, man! Evaluate away! Jacob Proffitt P.S. Um. How would you define an evaluative comment? That phrase means nothing to me. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:38:30 +1000 From: "helena.chester" Subject: RE: [AML] Polygamy > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Gae > Lyn Henderson > Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2001 1:49 > To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Subject: RE: [AML] Polygamy > > > The scriptures say that in the next life the first shall be > last and the > last shall be first. I think that we may be in for some > surprises relating > to "celestial marriage." And also the principle of "give and it shall be given unto you". If we are not willing to share in this life, then perhaps we will find that we will be the ones in want in the next life. I would like to see a writer > envision additional > possibilities to the ones we usually consider. > > If justice prevails (and God is justice), that men and women > will be truly > equal and valuable in eternity. I think the earthly cultures > that have > practiced polygamy reflect a fallen state. They reflect a > mistaken notion > that men are privileged in God's eyes. Just as the early > saints practiced > slavery out of mistaken cultural habit, they also followed > the polygamist > cultural practices of ancient Israel which, I believe, > reflected a fallen > misogynist earthy state. I think any relationship that devalues a person's worth reflects the fallen state, regardless of whether it is monogamous or polygamous. There are just as many ways monogamy can be misgynist as polygamy. In a just system in the next life, > either there > will be one man with one woman, or both sexes will enjoy > relationships with > more than one person. I think we are enriched by social relationships with more than one person, but for most women, it would take self-sacrificing love to share a partner sexually and also the emotional intimacy that usually accompanies it. I think the only way I could ever cope with it at this stage of my life would be to compartmentalise my life, and cut off emotionally at other times. I can't ever imagine giving myself totally to that kind of situation, yet maybe that is the kind of unselfishness that is required for the Celestial kingdom, (for both parties - male and female). > > I can't accept the model of a male with a harem of women > surrounding him. > But what I could accept is the reality that a woman can love > more than one > man. Men seem to believe that they are programmed sexually > to need more > than one partner, but I think women just as readily can be > attracted to and > want additional physical and emotional connections with more than one > person. The intensity of a one-to-one relationship would be diluted, > however, under such a system, because you really can't be spiritually, > emotionally, and physical connected to more than one person > at any given > moment. And those who have this total connection know that there is nothing in the world to compare with it! And it is almost as frightening to live with as an unsatisfactory relationship. We know how devastated we would be if it ended. A diluted relationship has some advantages in that area. Of course eternity would enable the time to make significant > connections with many people. > > I believe all of us are fully capable of loving many people > in different > ways. Absolutely! Perhaps the big surprise in heaven will be that men on > earth were not > ready to SHARE their woman with another man,, but that the > perfect love in > the celestial realm will allow such a possibility. > If the Celestial kingdom is all about unconditional love and doing for others what you would want others to do for you, then there would at least have to be gender equity. I can envisage perfect love being more embracing and intimate, with a wider variety of people. Perhaps all our interactions on the Celestial level will be more a fusion of spirits that gives the same ecstatic feeling of "oneness" that the sexual relationship does, with everyone. Helena - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:48:36 +1000 From: "helena.chester" Subject: RE: [AML] Polygamy > -----Original Message----- > > Like Darlene Young I too thought about sharing my husband > with a friend > that even now does not have a man of her own. I think about it now > because it would be nice to have a friend around to talk with when my > husband is to busy with work. I thought about whether I could do it too, and not for any advantage to me. I don't need anyone else's money, and this person had debts,not money. I didn't need her friendship or any help around the house. It was purely that she got on well with my husband (better than with me) and was very lonely and in difficult circumstances). I wondered whether I could be unselfish enough to share. She would call around and phone when I was at work, and I could cope with that, but, as well as not being my husband's desire, was not something I could do. I think if you are going to go the way of polygamy, you need to start that way. But, I can see that for some people it could be a way of meeting many other needs besides intimacy, and that may balance out the advantages of exclusiveness. [Helena Chester] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 18:23:40 -0600 From: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] An Iconography of Our Own on 9/6/01 6:17 PM, Barbara Hume at barbara@techvoice.com wrote: [MOD: Note that the following was actually written by someone else; Barbara was quoting and querying this statement.] >> . For example, for some reason the church has adopted the costumes of >> commerce as the costumes of spirituality. If this means why we've adopted suits and ties and dresses a la "dress for success," for religious meetings, I too am puzzled. Didn't this happen in the Roman Church as well, where the current dress of bishops, priests and prelates reflects the well-heeled, or well-robed, successful Roman entrepreneur of centuries past? Steve P. S. About once a quarter I get fed up with the idea of putting on a suit and tie--just can't bear to do it some days. So, I go to church with a nice, clean turtleneck or comfortable open-collared button shirt and pants, teach my class, do whatever. (I always enjoy church so much more and get more out of it when I'm not distracted by itchy scratchy constricting clothes designed with discomfort in mind.) On one of these days the chorister didn't show up and the bishop signaled to me to run up and lead the music. Afterwards a kindhearted sister approached my wife privately to offer me one of her husbands ties if I didn't have any. :-) LOL! - -- skperry@mac.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:58:40 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] An Iconography of Our Own - ---Original Message From: Barbara Hume > At 04:50 PM 9/5/01 -0600, you wrote: > >. For example, for some reason the church has adopted the > costumes of > >commerce as the costumes of spirituality. > > Would you elaborate on this remark, please? I don't get it. I'm not sure if this is what he meant, but I've found it interesting that we wear business attire to church. Suits for men, nice dresses for women. I'm not sure we'd be better served wearing jeans, but the extreme business etiquette is, um, odd. One thing I find interesting is that business has loosened up lately (you actually see CEOs wearing open collars and slacks and even IBM has loosened their dress code) but church has, if anything, become more formal. In a recent PEC meeting, we received a message from our stake leadership that informality is becoming a problem. People aren't taking their covenants seriously and are expecting concessions, for example, on temple attire for brides (with a mother becoming incensed when a dress that has become pearl in color with age was disallowed as adequate temple attire). The most interesting twist I find is that the forms of address that were adopted by Joseph Smith to break down formality (Brother and Sister so and so and the Thee and Thou address to God) are now being stressed to *enhance* formality--our stake actually emphasizes that we use "Brother Crawford" instead of "Dave". Times have changed more than just our technology. Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:46:25 -0400 From: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: [AML] Fw: MN Look out, Old Maid, here's Bishop Rick: Deseret News 1Sep01 US UT SLC B4 Look out, Old Maid, here's Bishop Rick LINDON, UTAH -- Reed and Eve Hansen have developed "Bishop Rick," a unique version of "Old Maid." The Hansen's run Scripture Creations Inc. from their home. "Bishop Rick" is one of several games the Hansens created. Their other games include "Fishing for Nephites" which is scriptural "Go Fish", "Concentrate on LDS Presidents" which focuses on knowledge of church leaders, and "Articles of Faith" which includes a tiny die that, when rolled, will tell players how many words one must recite of a specific Article of Faith. The games are available in Utah book, game and grocery stores and in several foreign countries. Deseret Book has featured the card games in its mailer the past few months, and BYU ordered 800 maps for an upcoming religion teachers' conference. "Bishop Rick" is a children's game that teaches about callings in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in a fun way. The game depicts characters such as Clerk Clark, Chorister Connie and Priesthood Preston in a humorous way. Priesthood Preston is shown drawing football plays on the chalkboard to teach church doctrine. Relief Society Rita has a to-do list that goes on forever. "It's all meant to be fun, but we didn't want a negative concept," Hansen said. "So we turned it around. In the bishop-friendly version, if you get the bishop card, you win." Source: Look out, Old Maid, here's Bishop Rick Deseret News 1Sep01 B4 http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,295021399,00.html By Sharon Haddock: Deseret News staff writer LDS-themed card games fill a niche >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #448 ******************************