From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #451 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 Friday, September 14 2001 Volume 01 : Number 451 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:10:52 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: RE: [AML] Product Placement in Writing At 01:21 PM 9/11/01 -0600, you wrote: >Oh my. Isn't that interesting? For as long as I can remember, writer's >guides have been telling people to avoid mentioning products--mainly to >avoid being sued by companies who are fighting "genericide". I wonder >if this kind of thing will catch on or not. That's quite a tightrope >for a corporate policy to walk--encourage prominent mention for purposes >of product exposure, but simultaneously avoid loss of your trademark to >genericide. I find that in early 19th-century novels, specific products and places of business are sometimes mentioned. I think it was to give the story a familiar and realistic setting. If my lord wishes to purchase an expensive piece of jewelry to placate my lady, he goes to Rundell and Bridges. Everybody knows that, so why make up a jeweler? If he attends the theater, he goes to see Kean. If he wants a new coat that reflects his wealthy and privileged state, he goes to Weston. If he wants to purchase duelling pistols, he goes to Manton's. If he wants a pair of Hessian boots, he goes to Hoby. I enjoy looking through primary material for references of this kind. barbara hume - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:49:43 +1000 From: "helena.chester" Subject: RE: [AML] Polygamy Helena: Stephen, I found this perspective very interesting, and gained additional valuable insights. > > Contrary to the popular belief that most women in > polygynous relationships > are down-trodden, brainwashed, and abused, Bennion pointed > out that women from > mainstream Mormonism are actually attracted to polygyny > because of the chance > it offers them to be independent and to integrate into a more > accepting > community. Men, on the other hand, usually join polygynous > communities because > of religious ideology, and have a harder time integrating. Helena:I can imagine that trying to treat all the wives fairly, is just as challenging for a man as sharing a husband is for a woman. > "There is nothing more powerful to women than female > friendship," she said. Helena: That is only true when the women aren't competing for the same resources. Women can be very hurtful to each other when their security, or relationship is threatened. If a woman can share a man, she can probably share anything else, and would probably make a wonderful friend. I have seen a special "celestial" quality in the women who can successfully live plural marriage. > Not all women are made for polygyny, however, Bennion said. > Polygyny is made > for women who would prefer the comradeship of other women > with a man around > only now and then, to the more individualistic lifestyle of monogamy. I think that is the key to successful polygamy. There are personality characteristics that make different arrangements more suitable for different people. When I get home from work, the last thing I would want is to be surrounded by a household of women. I want time by myself to relax and do things I enjoy. But,I do know other women who just hate to be alone, and would spend every spare minute doing things together. And I enjoy the company of men more than women too--even as close friends. I have always related better to men and found more in common to talk about. Also being affectionate towards men comes more naturally to me. I tend to gravitate towards men as "best friends". > As for the men, life isn't always so good. Though the males > are officiall in > charge of religious, economic, and community decisions, they > are technically > homeless. > "The men are wanderers, vagabonds, they have no place of > their own," Bennion > said. The men go from one wife's house to another. One man, > she said, built a > small library of Reader's Digest condensed books in one of the home's > bathrooms, making it into "the only room where he could have > some time to > himself." I hadn't thought of this aspect before, but I can relate that to my husband's needs. He loves our home, and it really is his castle. He has far more emotional investment in it than I have. To me, it is just somewhere to store all my books and make it possible to foster my relationships and interests. I like to be comfortable and I have everything I need here. But, it is more than that to my husband. To be forced to go from one house to another, as a vagabond, would be a price I don't think he would be prepared to pay. the factors that contribute > to abuse, such > as a rigid religious and patriarchal environment, lots of > children, and > economic deprivation are as much a part of many monogamous > relationships as > they are of polygynous ones. Agreed! > Her experience with the Allred Group convinced Bennion that > polygynous > relationships have as many upsides and downsides as > monogamous ones. She > suggested that people should be more accepting of polygynous > people. Agreed! As long as the families don't expect society to pay unfairly for their choices. And as long as these relationships are entered into by adults exercising free agency. She predicted that gay and lesbian marriages > would be approved > before polygynous ones. I suspect they will be approved of around the same time. Tolerance for gay and lesbian marriages has the same foundation as that required for polygynous ones--recognising that we are all different, and our responsibility is limited to choosing the right/best for OURSELVES, and letting others do the same for themselves. Helena - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:23:15 -0600 From: MGA Subject: Re: [AML] Polygamy I am currently dealing with this very issue in a novel I am writing. The first quarter dealt with polygamy for a female's point of view. Those chapters literally poured form my pen. For nearly two years I've been struggling with the second quarter that deals with polygamy from the point of view of a husband with two wives. In trying to be as honest as possible, my depiction of the practice is coming across as pure torture for this character. He loves both women, but of course feels a stronger attachment with his first wife (given their longer history together). He admires his independent second wife's strength and force of character (traits that his first wife doesn't display. But whenever he is drawn to his second wife, he feels obligated to somehow "make it up" to his first wife--who is much emotionally very fragile and dependent on him. Sexually, he is attracted to both women; but when with one, feels he is cheating on the other. Then sex becomes obligatory rather than spontaneous. To make matters more uncomfortable, he knows that his first wife knows when his attention sexually arise from a sense of duty rather than desire. At the end of this section of the story, the husband is emotionally exhausted. He feels as if he is drowning in a sea of femininity. He feels that he has become, in a sense, a mere machine. So, I tend to believe that, sexist masculine stereotype aside, polygamy was just as hard on CONSCIENTIOUS husbands. ROB LAUER - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:36:32 -0600 From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: RE: [AML] Suspicion of Art Jacob Proffit wrote:=20 there is nothing inherently virtuous about 'art'=20 Eric Samuelsen replied:=20 And here I must differ. Art is not just communication. Art is an attempt = to communicate the deepest and most essential parts of the human condition,= to in some measure tell a truth that we may or may not find palateable. = And therefore, it remains, for me and my house, a privileged communication,= inherently and automatically virtuous and important and treasured, unless = an enormous preponderance of evidence suggests that this one piece of art, = unlike all others, is in fact damaging. I still maintain that actual bad = art, actually damaging art is something very rare.=20 ___________________________________=20 I am afraid I must side with Jacob. Art becomes the kind of communication = Eric mentions because of the reader/viewer/audience. It's not inherent in = the work itself, which is why some things like Moby Dick or the work of = Van Gogh can be overlooked and scorned for so long. Were this virtue an = essential part of the work of art, wouldn't people get it right off the = bat?=20 - --=20 Todd Robert Petersen=20 - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:41:22 -0700 From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Product Placement in Writing On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:06:22 "Jeff Needle" asks about product placement in novels after Fay Well Done, the good and faithful servant of the jewelry industry placed a store in her novel. Jeff Wonders (that should have a superscripted R next to it, as a registered trademark for a product it's a wonder people call bread, but this list doesn't go out in HTML and there's no tag for putting a circle around a letter) if product placement is gnu in gnovels. Thing is, people have been mentioning products placement in stories for years. When Doug Thayer's "Greg" came out in Dialogue Merriam Rogers, who lived just across 9th East in Provo from Carson's Market, said that the store would be famous now because Greg walks past it in the story. Merriam's daughter, Grace, told me that an airliner had offered writers a certain sum for every mention of the airline in a story published in a national magazine, so a woman wrote a New Yorker story set in an airport, where it's natural to hear the names of airlines over the intercom frequently. Because so many people mention products in stories you always see ads in writers' mags like, "Don't use Writer's Disgust as a generic term for an editorial writer's trade magazine," or, "Remember, Kleen Necks is brand name for scarves used by bikers in leather jackets, not a generic, or "Remember that Hanky Spanky should have a little R in a circle next to it, as it is a registered trademark for the truly R-Rated men's magazine. In addition, 'Hanky Spanker' should not be used as a generic for men who espouse our general philosophy; we urge you instead to use a truly generic term like 'playboy.'" Harlow S. [hey, maybe I could superscript that and add an M] Clark ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:12:49 -0700 From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: Re: [AML] Product Placement in Writing - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jacob Proffitt" To: Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 12:21 PM Subject: RE: [AML] Product Placement in Writing > ---Original Message From: Jeff Needle > > 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? > > Oh my. Isn't that interesting? For as long as I can remember, writer's > guides have been telling people to avoid mentioning products--mainly to > avoid being sued by companies who are fighting "genericide". I wonder > if this kind of thing will catch on or not. That's quite a tightrope > for a corporate policy to walk--encourage prominent mention for purposes > of product exposure, but simultaneously avoid loss of your trademark to > genericide. > > Jacob Proffitt No surprise I don't know what "genericide" means. The author has said publicly she's quite happy with the arrangement. An iconoclast of some stature, she doesn't mind bringing down yet one more wall. [Jeff Needle] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:56:38 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: [AML] Homogeneity in Art (was: Polygamy) - ---Original Message From: althlevip > I am afraid I feel that the person who accepts polygamy also > believes in the innate inferiority of women to men. To me > that is an immoral position. Interesting. Your statement implies that God doesn't accept polygamy (being incapable of holding immoral positions)--which is itself a position I consider, if not directly immoral, at least at odds with a testimony of Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God. I want to use this to illustrate a point and I want to be careful to point out here that I am not attacking Levi or his testimony in this post. What I want to point out is that he and I hold mutually exclusive points of view about LDS beliefs and yet we are both (I believe) active, faithful members of the church. This post could as easily have been prompted by any of a whole pantheon of individual doctrines that contradict each other but are not official, actionable church orthodoxies. We have a great deal of latitude in our beliefs and I wonder if this latitude doesn't explain the homogeneity of our art. As I dig into the internal beliefs of those around me, I'm somewhat amazed at the spectrum of individuation in our doctrine. There are significant divergences even in core teachings. If you dig deep enough, we could probably find a point of significant divergence between any two given church members no matter how seemingly orthodox our comments in Gospel Doctrine class. Which brings me to our art. I *hate* _The Giant Joshua_ because it violates what I consider to be core doctrine--I find it faithless and misrepresentative of my faith because of the godless barrenness presented as truth. Others on the list *love* it because it validates their own feelings and core values. This is not just a matter of balancing or choosing audiences, however. If you emulate Maureen Whipple, you will not only lose me as a consumer of your work, you will find me vociferous in my distaste. I *can't* live and let live because it violates my belief in a loving, active God. I have no antagonism towards Maureen Whipple, in fact, I have a great deal of compassion for her because of her feeling of being persecuted by people who profess a doctrine of love (a compassion that she'd probably find condescending, though that is hardly my intent). But I feel no compunction against actively attacking her book. I know I come across as somewhat militant when I say things like that about _The Giant Joshua_. I'm actually more than willing to change my opinion should I be proved wrong. And I'm more than willing to embrace Maureen Whipple as a faithful member of the church even when I feel I'm right. I tolerate the individual beliefs of *all* the members around me until they openly repudiate the church and our actual, stated doctrine. And frankly, even if I violently disagree with someone's internal doctrine, I will try not to make any statements about their worthiness or their eventual eternal destination (because, frankly, I don't know anything about their worthiness or eventual eternal destination). But that doesn't mean that I'll buy their books. Or that I'll seek their advice in my own meditations. Or that I won't express my disagreement with what they profess. Now, if an author wants to reach the widest audience possible, they would do well to avoid engendering the distaste of their audience. By all accounts I've heard, Maureen Whipple was surprised with the LDS reception of _The Giant Joshua_. I've heard others pass off the rejection as a parochialism of the times. I don't think that is true. In fact, I think that the modern softening of the opposition towards the book is largely due to its receding immediacy, not to the softening of the core objections. And I think that most authors know that inclusion of their own idiosyncratic doctrines in their work will have the same effect (unless a good deal of time is spent justifying their viewpoint and/or reassuring consumers on core beliefs)--i.e. that people will reject, possibly strenuously, things contrary to their passionate beliefs. With religion, it is close to impossible to celebrate diversity. I certainly don't celebrate the advent of _The Giant Joshua_ however much I might be willing to tolerate its presence and even popularity. Is this reaction a good thing? I don't know. It takes a certain fortitude to brave the fiery darts of the incensed dogmatist. A fortitude not all authors can afford. I certainly regret that Katherine Kidd won't write any more humorous books because of the negative reaction of her own ward. I feel that we've lost a valuable voice that helps us to see ourselves a little more clearly. But I can't control the members of Katherine Kidd's ward and I'm not willing to shut up about things I disagree with personally so I'd have a hard time doing anything about them even if I *could*. So our artists pay a price for the effrontery of expressing themselves. It's up to each artist to decide what sort of price they're willing to pay. Frankly, we shouldn't be terribly surprised if many of them decide that the price is too high and tone down or even halt their rhetoric in response. You can mouth all the platitudes you want to of how artists should be bold and resist kowtowing to the prevailing orthodoxy, but I'm not willing to tell someone that they should sacrifice their personal relationships with people they love for the sake of their artistic "integrity". We all make decisions about what hills are worth dying on and what battles we are willing to lose in order to preserve ourselves for the coming day. Perhaps our homogeneity can be seen as a form of preserving our strength for matters we consider more important. Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:28:34 -0400 From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] Polygamy Regarding my observation that men were holding back from the discussion on polygamy, Jacob Proffitt wrote: > > Well, don't hold back, man! Evaluate away! > > P.S. Um. How would you define an evaluative comment? That phrase means > nothing to me. To me an evaluative word, phrase, comment, summary, or tome would say if you are for or against something. I don't think it's a real term in common usage, just something that popped out. For polygamy, it gets a little complicated, and I'm not at all sure I can relate it to Mormon Arts and Letters, but since I'm responding to a direct question on a topic that may wind up in Barbara's sci-fi story, then maybe it will pass. I tend to read some things in the scriptures far more literally than most people are comfortable with. Over and over we are admonished to be as one, to take each other's sorrows upon ourselves. And when we are sealed to a spouse, I think this takes the concept of being as one to a whole new level, that the twain shall be as one flesh. With children, it is an even closer degree of unity--they are literally flesh of our flesh, bone of our bone. I think God is One with his children. He feels our sorrows and joys. He is literally with us at all times. Present. Even in our most private and intimate moments, I believe that God is One with us. We are already sharing our families. How much more we will share in the Celestial Kingdom when all of Adam's children will have been sealed to each other? When we will all be each other's flesh and bone? My finite senses can barely begin to grasp this kind of unity and oneness, but when and if I do, I'll probably look back on earthly polygamy as basically no big deal one way or the other. Tony Markham - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:45:13 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Product Placement in Writing Jacob Proffitt wrote: > > Oh my. Isn't that interesting? For as long as I can remember, writer's > guides have been telling people to avoid mentioning products--mainly to > avoid being sued by companies who are fighting "genericide". Stephen King braks this rule all the time. Nobody wears shoes in his books, they were Berkenstocks. Thom - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:08:13 -0700 From: "Frank Maxwell" Subject: Re: [AML] Material for Eric S. Eric Samuelsen wrote: > I should point out that Steve only posted this after privately sending me > material on the McDonald's scam and asking me what I thought of it. What > I think of it is that it's probably the greatest material for a play I've > ever seen in my entire life and I was up till two in the morning > sketching out an outline. I've got to figure out how to do it without > getting sued: any suggestions? How about tackling it the same way that "Law & Order" does? Keep the basic elements of the case (i.e., fraud, Mormons, major fast-food corporation), but change the names & identifying characteristics of the people involved. That would give you the freedom to examine the motives, emotions and mindset of people who might do such a thing, without the requirement to accurately represent the defendants' side of the story. > But wow. Ever notice how the last three letters in > McDonalds are LDS? Are you thinking of depicting McDonalds as an innocent victim? If you'd like to get a good look at the company behind the scenes, I recommend the new book "Fast Food Nation" by journalist Eric Schlosser (Houghton Mifflin, 2001). Schlosser tries to be fair, but accurate. One of the incidents it recounts is how McDonalds was sued successfully by Sid & Marty Krofft, creators of the old TV show "H.R. Pufnstuf", because the McDonalds-land characters and story was a rip-off of the Pufnstuf show. You might also look at mcspotlight.com, which details the recent British "McLibel" case, in which the company sued anti-McDonalds activists. The court allowed the activists to produce all sorts of interesting evidence to prove their defense that McDonalds food was indeed unhealthy. If corporations could be baptized, those activists would question whether McDonalds could pass the worthiness interview. > > A Mormon real estate developer and his wife are among the eight people > > arrested in a scam to defraud fast food restaurant chain McDonald's of > the > > winning game pieces in its popular "Monopoly" and similar promotions. > Noah D. > > "Dwight" Baker and his wife Linda Baker are charged with recruiting > friends > > and relatives to cash in the winning game pieces, in a fraud that so far > > totals $13.8 million. What I'd really like to know is whether they paid tithing on the money they made in this fraud.* Regards, Frank Maxwell * They have to pay income tax on illegal income. Why not tithing? - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:03:51 -0600 From: Chris Grant Subject: Re: [AML] Fw: MN Newsweek Cover Takes Flawed, Skeptical Look atLDS Church: Kent Larsen 3Sep01 US NY NYC N1 Rob Lauer writes: [...] >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. I haven't read Woodward's latest article carefully. Has the Church's focus on Christ convinced him to retract what he wrote in 1980: "Jesus' suffering and death in the Mormon view were brotherly acts of compassion, but they do not atone for the sins of others." [...] >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. An article in the 7/22/2000 issue of the _Church News_ seems to disagree: "It's the best year we've ever had," said Dick Ahern, chairman of media relations, referring to missionary referrals and interest by the press. . . . Brother Ahern attributes the growth in attendance to an emphasis on the spiritual aspect of the pageant and less on the theatrical aspects. "Several years ago we wondered if participation would drop with an emphasis on 'feeling the Savior's love' instead of highlighting the special effects." The pageant actually enjoys "the largest crowds it has known" since the first pageant was performed in 1935. Chris Grant grant@math.byu.edu - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:55:10 -0700 From: "Terri Reid" Subject: Re: [AML] Fw: MN Newsweek Cover Takes Flawed,Skeptical Look at LDSChurch: Kent Larsen 3Sep01 US NY NYC N1 My non-LDS friend commented that she had met "lots better looking Mormons than those." I thanked her and agreed. Terri - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:08:31 -0600 From: "Paris ANDERSON" Subject: [AML] An Iconography of Our own Jim Picht wrote: That would be consistent with the way some older members of my wards have seen it - a beard doesn't show disrespect for = God, it shows contempt for them and their values. I think you're right on, there. It's really funny, but when my eyes = went bad and I started wearing an eye-patch, old men at Church and old = ladies suddenly became very polite. No one ever tells me my clothes or = hair are inappropriate anymore. My hair and beard are black, black, so = they must think I'm Alice Cooper's little brother--Evelyn Cooper. For a long time I was very upset that people at Church judged me because = of my appearance (I used to stagger a lot and frontal lobe damage does = something that makes it so you don't give much for grooming--it used to = be that I didn't even notice things until they were pointed out . . . = still don't sometimes). I guess the Good Lord fixed that problem by = giving me an eye-patch. Paris Anderson (I mean, Her Holiness, Sister Evelyn Cooper) - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:42:00 -0700 From: Jerry Tyner Subject: RE: [AML] An Iconography of Our Own James Picht said: >> Facial hair and grooming standards of spirituality also tend toward a conservative business standard. I don't know why we decided to march to IBM's drum, but we did. I wonder whether, rather than show deity respect, our dress is meant to show other members respect? That would be consistent with the way some older members of my wards have seen it - a beard doesn't show disrespect for God, it shows contempt for them and their values. << I don't know if this is wrong but I tend to look at it as "for the weakest of the Saints or those who can be called Saints" type of thing. Not everyone is flexible even though we should be. We have kind of a progressive Ward and there are some members who don't wear ties and a few with facial hair. There was an investigator who showed up in shorts last Sunday and everyone I saw shook hand and said welcome. My wife and daughter love my facial hair but I wear a white shirt and tie every Sunday. I do this mainly because my old Stake President told me when I came home from my mission to always look like a return missionary. My old Mission President commented on my facial hair at our mission reunion last month but I didn't hear him say anything to the other two who were there with goatees. It is just interesting how some people feel about dress and facial hair (my mother wouldn't allow me to kiss her if she were alive today). It is just funny sometimes to see who will get upset if you do something out of the "norm". Jerry Tyner - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:47:58 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] An Iconography of Our Own Barbara Hume wrote: > I don't understand why it's a "problem." The point is for people to attend > church and receive the sacrament, and if people feel unwelcome because they > can't afford the costume, then we have a Rameumpton (or however you spell > it) situation. I know that I would look forward to church more if it were > not for the necessity of wearing uncomfortable stuff. One of the things I liked about General Conference weekend was that there was at least one weekend every six months where I didn't have to dress up in that @%$*@^%*& suit and tie. Except the priesthood session ruined it! Imagine, having to dress up to watch TV! So I'd just skip it. Hey, the speeches would be in next month's Ensign anyway. Now I have a teenaged son who's got the Aaronic priesthood. Now I feel obligated to set a good example to bring him to the session. Now I have no relief from the suit and tie. - -- 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 http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:04:47 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Product Placement in Writing Jeff Needle wrote: > 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? I wouldn't find product placement in literature any more alarming than in movies. But what you described isn't product placement, which is the passive appearance of a product in a film. This is active advertising, where the story itself is actually contorted for the sole purpose of advertising a business. This is a trend that doesn't appeal to me. - -- 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 http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:53:30 -0400 From: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: [AML] Fw: MN New Periodical for Gospel Study: BYU Religious Studies Center Press Release 6Sep01 US UT Prov D3 New Periodical for Gospel Study PROVO, UTAH -- BYU's Religious Studies Center is introducing "The Religious Educator", a new periodical for LDS religion teachers focused on teaching methodology. "I think there are a lot of LDS magazines aimed at the broad Mormon audience: The New Era, The Ensign, BYU Studies. We aren't trying to re-invent the wheel; we've picked a niche," says Dr. Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, Editor-in-Chief. "All of these resources have great content to use in classes, but there just haven't been any that focus on how to apply that content." Each issue will also cover hard-to-teach topics, including doctrines on family and marriage. The contributions to each issue are carefully reviewed and edited by experienced teachers, writers, and scholars. The advisory board, started by BYU religion faculty, sought out additional non-BYU faculty to join them -- from early morning seminary teachers to Institute directors around the country. "We want to make sure we have crossing of college and departmental lines so that there is a healthy cross pollination of views and insights on teaching," explains Holzapfel. He adds that the Associate Editor, Ted D. Stoddard, teaches writing courses for the business department, but is also a Gospel Doctrine teacher in his ward. The Religious Educator will be published twice a year starting in early September. For more information visit http://tre.byu.edu . Source: New Periodical for Gospel Study BYU Religious Studies Center Press Release 6Sep01 US UT Prov D3 >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 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 21:36:10 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Product Placement in Writing - ---Original Message From: Jeff Needle > > No surprise I don't know what "genericide" means. > > The author has said publicly she's quite happy with the > arrangement. An iconoclast of some stature, she doesn't mind > bringing down yet one more wall. Okay, I'm not a lawyer and all I know about it comes from reading Writer's Digest years ago. Genericide is when a company loses control of a trademark because it has come to represent the more general product. Once your trademark has become of general use in the public arena to refer to a type of product, they can no longer tell people they can't use that trademark when referring to that type of product and their competitors can use that trademark under much more lenient terms. Thus, Coke fights for authors to refer to having a Coke beverage, or a Coke soft-drink and not to refer to a character simply having a Coke. Once Coke becomes a general term to refer to all soft drinks, then Pepsi could market their product by saying "Pepsi is the more refreshing coke." I can't come up with specific examples where this has happened (Kleenex?), but it has and it's a fear of all companies with significant investment in a trademark (Nike, Reebok, and Coke are the most common examples for writers). [MOD: The classic case I know about is Xerox, which very nearly became a common-usage verb, as in "I'll xerox that." But I understand the Xerox corporation fought against that (I'm not sure how--threats of lawsuits?) and now the more common term is "photocopy."] Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:05:03 -0400 From: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: [AML] Fw: MN Restored BY Academy Building Dedicated as Provo Library: Salt Lake Tribune 9Sep01 US UT Prov D6 Restored BY Academy Building Dedicated as Provo Library PROVO, UTAH -- It was a sad sight. The 108-year-old Brigham Young Academy Building sagged in disrepair after being sold by Brigham Young University in 1975. There were attempts to use the historic building, but it was finally slated for the wrecking ball. That's when Academy supporters enlisted BYU engineering professor Douglas Smoot to help save the building. "My first reaction was why would anyone in his right mind accept such a seemingly impossible challenge . . . But I could not dispel a sense of obligation to my great-grandfather," said Smoot, great-grandson of Abraham O. Smoot, the man challenged by Brigham Young to back the fledgling academy that later became BYU. Provo voters passed a $16.9 million library bond in 1997 to move the library to Academy Square. A.O. Smoot used his personal fortune to fund most of the construction of the building, now his great-grandson and the Academy supporters raised $6.9 million which was used to restore the exterior and donated $1 million to the city of Provo to maintain the new library. While the exterior remains true to the original architecture, the interior is a state-of-the-art library which more than 100 computers, conference rooms, underground and above-ground parking, and many more modern amenities. "This building and the sense of history . . . has absolutely taken my breath away. I was unprepared for how beautiful this building is," said LDS Church Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland, who recalled attending church in the historic building on crisp fall mornings as a student at Brigham Young University in the mid-1960s. Source: New Provo Library Remains True to Its Historic Roots Salt Lake Tribune 9Sep01 D6 http://www.sltrib.com/09092001/utah/130573.htm By Mark Eddington: Salt Lake Tribune >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 #451 ******************************