From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #573 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, January 15 2002 Volume 01 : Number 573 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:41:35 -0600 From: James Picht Subject: Re: [AML] Anna Karenina (was: Must-Read Lists) Rose Green wrote: > I have to agree with others, however, that something like Crime and Punishment > was't enjoyable for me to read. Maybe Dostoyevsky is important, and yes, I'm > glad I've read some of his works, but mostly I just find them depressing. > Maybe it's because I just can't relate to the experience of being an > ax-murderer. You needn't relate to being an ax-murderer to enjoy _Crime and Punishment_. The novel isn't about murder, but about the ideas that could lead a man to the real crime of the novel, setting himself off from humanity, and the ideas that could bring him back. The murder is almost incidental to Raskolnikov's spiritual crisis - it's a symptom, not the cause. The crime in the title is his rejection of humanity for an idea - rather, his love of humanity in the abstract rather than for the flawed humans around him. The pride of intellectual superiority and the justification of evil with the desire to bring about a greater good are things many of us _can_ relate to. That said, the novel ends on an unresolved but hopeful chord. Raskolnikov may be redeemed or he may not be, but he's interested in making the attempt. A much more 'entertaining' Dostoyevsky novel is _The Brothers Karamazov_. It has its grim moments, but again ends on a note of hope and redemption. More actually goes on in the novel than in C&P, so that may make it seem a little friendlier to the reader. Jim Picht - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:49:52 EST From: BroHam000@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Life in Mormon Culture Okay, so let's differentiate here; there is "Mormon" culture, and there is the culture of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. People all over the world seem to be able to adapt well to the culture of the latter (play on words); the former seems to throw up as many roadblocks as stepping stones. I think often that I am very glad to be raising my children in the South where they have the opportunity on a daily basis to think about what they believe and why. For them the programs of the Church are reinforcers that help them hold to the Rod of Iron. I do have to say: even here I have been stymied about the seemingly narrow confines of scouting and basketball. Since my husband has been a scoutmaster for a few years, though, I see that what counts are the principles Scouting seeks to inculcate, which are truly wholly compatible with those of the Priesthood. I can definitely see its benefit. It lies with those who work with the youth to see how to best help each one learn the principles; sometimes we get programs and principles confused I guess. I think that is every bit as true in Utah (and Idaho, where I grew up) and everywhere else in traditional "Mormondom" as it is "in the mission field". The programs can be exciting if the members hunker down to the Spirit and make them that way. And by the way, we had a killer New Year's Eve dance, augmented by BYU fans here for the Liberty Bowl (ouch!). Linda Hyde - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:33:18 -0700 From: "Sharlee Glenn" Subject: Re: [AML] Annual Movie Tabulation Eric Snider wrote: > I loved the music in this movie, but surely there's a musical film that used > music better. "Moulin Rouge," for example -- or "Mary Poppins," which > happens to be the most perfect movie musical of all time. (See, there _I_ go > doing it.) Yes! "Mary Poppins" is brilliant--practically perfect in every way. It is my favorite Disney film ever. Not only does it seamlessly integrate the music into the action, but it does a masterful job of combining animation and live action (who can forget Dick Van Dyke dancing with the penguins?). The script is endlessly witty ("But George, dear, you don't even play the piano." "Madame, that is entirely beside the point!" or "Oh George! You didn't jump in the river. How sensible of you."), and the acting is top-notch. Long live Mary Poppins! By the way, for those of you who haven't read the books by P. L. Travers upon which the film was based (_Mary Poppins_, _Mary Poppins Comes Back_, _Mary Poppins in the Park_, etc.), they are thoroughly delightful. Full of British charm and humor. Read them aloud to your children. Sharlee Glenn glennsj@inet-1.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:42:13 -0700 From: "Sharlee Glenn" Subject: Re: [AML] Life in Mormon Culture Chris Bigelow wrote: "Actually, I don't trust the mainstream Church to ever do much that way. I just wish Sunstone and the AML had youth programs . . . " What a great idea! I'm serious. How about a youth chapter of the AML? We really ought to be doing more to encourage our young people to consume and produce quality literature. What say ye? Sharlee Glenn glennsj@inet-1.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:45:57 -0700 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Annual Movie Tabulation - ---Original Message From: Eric R. Samuelsen > Gladiator was marketed as, well, a gladiator movie. I loved > it because of its take on the afterlife, and on the eternal > nature of families. Okay, there was no actual Roman emporer > with the unfortunate name of Commodus, and the much touted > special effects are nothing special actually, and it's pretty > violent. But the central story is about a man who wants to > die, who knows that he can only see his wife and son again in > the afterlife. He's driven to fulfill his duty before he > dies, but really, he wants to go home, and home's not here. > I think it's a deeply religious movie, and I actually think > it should have won the Oscar last year. I just saw this movie (on DVD), and I have to say that while I agree with what Eric says about the religious/family theme, the movie left me pretty cold. Definitely not Oscar-worthy. I came away from it with a shrug and a "nice fighting sequences". It took a long discussion with Melissa to pin down why I was so blas=E9 about the movie. I wasn't engaged in the least. What it comes down to for me is that Maximus spends the whole movie yearning for the afterlife and his dead family and utterly fails to make any connections to the people around him. The movie is as littered with failed opportunities for rewarding relationships as it is with bloody corpses. Maximus fails to connect with Proximo, his Numidian buddy, his Germanian buddy, *an* *ex*-*lover*!!! Good grief, what a wasted movie. Here were all these people he might have connected with and we get *nothing*. The camaraderie, japes, shared hopes, and dreams of an enforced all-male fraternity? Nah. The poignancy of an ex-lover who suffers the loss of a spouse as you do? Too much trouble. A mentor relationship where learning and respect are earned and flow both ways? Why bother? They didn't even explore (beyond a most surface mention) the very issue built into the title--entertaining through creative killing. The movie was a huge heap of wasted opportunity. Not that I want *all* those things in the movie. I'd have settled for *one*. *Anything* that would have made that final sacrifice, his final reunion with the family he set out to rejoin, a poignant consummation of a journey that had value. As it was, I was left feeling like I'd seen some decent fight scenes with a reluctant warrior created to appeal to 20th century audiences. And nothing more. > Linda also hated Clueless, one of the greatest comedies ever > made, and a wonderful LDS film. Isn't it a movie about not > judging others? I *love* Clueless. It is not only one of the greatest comedies ever made, and a wonderful LDS film. It is also one of the sharpest adaptations of Jane Austen's "Emma" I've seen. Lovely, lovely film with a wonderful moral, entertaining heroine, and a great adaptation of regency (was Austen Regency? I can never remember) privileged society. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:16:27 -0700 (MST) From: Margaret Blair Young Subject: [AML] Re: _The Other Side of Heaven_ Interesting thoughts from my mom on _The Other Side of Heaven_: Forwarded from: Robert Blair robertwblair@hotmail.com - ----------- start of forwarded message ----------- Dear Margaret, Enjoyed your "Thomas Moore" note. It was appropriate and interesting. So was Snider's reply. It reminded me of other reviewers whom I have felt really missed the heart of a production. I think we all agree that the book dipicts more of the internal struggle than the movie does and there is much left out that we wish were in the movie. But both the book and movie are beautiful testimonies of faith and of God's love for His children. I am struck, as I recall our mission experience, with the goodness and innocence of most LDS missionaries. When Bob was asked what he learned as a mission president, his response was: "to respect the missionaries, and I mean really respect them." The respect isn't necessarily earned through missionaries overcoming personal struggles, but through their pure faith and determination -- regardless. And there are huge challenges. The language learning bit in the movie didn't capture the desperation and determination many experience. But it was symbolic of this and of the miraculous linguistic gift some are given. This symbolism was poignant to me. Also enchanting was the portrayal of the love and understanding a young man or woman , through giving themselves, come to have of a foreign culture and people. Missionaries have moments of homesickness, but they know that they are with their brothers and sisters in their mission field and they don't feel sorry for themselves nor do they question what they are doing. They want to bring people to Christ. The motion picture, I believe, is not intended to be a representation of an LDS missionary's struggle, but a birds-eye view of his experience. I have enjoyed the movie more each time (four) I've seen it. Love, Mom _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. - ------------ end of forwarded message ------------ - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:26:28 -0700 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Reading Programs The most important thing for me is the get the desired books onto my home shelves. But rather than just browsing the shelves when I'm ready for a new book, I type all the titles into my computer under certain categories I've identified as important, and then I rotate among those categories. The categories I've identified as crucial to me are: WRITING, EDITING, PUBLISHING CLASSIC FICTION (author dead) MARRIAGE & PARENTING CONTEMPORARY FICTION (author alive) MORMON NONFICTION MORMON FICTION GENERAL NONFICTION (I may split off a MEMOIR & BIOGRAPHY category soon) Another category would be CURRENT WRITING PROJECT BACKGROUND MATERIAL, and this is the only physical shelf that I keep the books organized on (all the other categories are just jumbled together throughout the house). For the missionary memoir I'm working on, this shelf contains all the missionary-related books in my possession, all the books on Melbourne and Australia I've seen fit to put my hands on, and some other titles I want to read to specifically inform this work. I try to have one of these books going at all times. Actually, the reality is that I usually have 6-7 books going at one time from the various categories. If I don't have other priorities, I try to cycle my new reading choices in roughly the order of the categories above, although I tend to skip CLASSIC FICTION and MARRIAGE & PARENTING. But if a Scott Parkin recommends something like a _Heartbreaking Work_, I'll break ranks and jump onto that right away. (BTW, I really enjoyed that book and found it compulsively readable and entertaining, but I am NOT at all tempted to try any Eggersian literary tricks of my own and don't particularly want to see other people imitate him much.) Frankly, I give more of my time and energy to periodicals than books, which I don't necessarily feel good about, but I'm a magazine junkie. I rip out a lot of material from periodicals and either act on it immediately or file it for future use. Answering some of Darlene's specific points: <<>> Mine is ongoing, obviously. <<>> I choose books mainly because of news or reviews in magazines and newspapers, word of mouth, and less often brick-and-mortar bookstore browsing. I always check half.com first and then usually go to Amazon.com. I have certain authors I just automatically keep up with. <<>> Well, one of the reasons I do so much periodical reading is that I ALWAYS have a magazine with me, and I steal time to browse and read it whenever I can, including nearly all meetings at work or church, dinners where people stop talking or get on a subject I'm not interested in, while waiting in lines, while supervising the kids' play or videos (I still absorb too much Disney, though), and in the bathroom. The way I balance different kinds of reading is just to keep things from all the various food groups on my plate at any given time (my plate meaning my briefcase and my little reading table next to my black leather reading chair). As far as balancing reading and writing goals, I would almost always rather read than write, so I don't let myself read between 9-11 p.m. But I still keep my can parked in the leather chair during that timeframe, and I keep the warm, purring laptop on my lap so I have to write. The 9:00 bewitching hour is well known in my household, though I have to continually remind people that it's fairly sacred (except when it isn't). My biggest reading management problem is that I'm always about 6 inches behind on my periodicals, and I buy books much faster than I read them so I'm several yards behind on those. I'm getting more selective in all my reading about asking, before starting and during any book or article, "OK, how does this relate to me, what do I hope to get out of it?" But it's also fun just to drift into unexpected discoveries, which is why I like the New Yorker so much. But books are way too time-consuming to spontaneously drift into, for me. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:11:01 -0700 From: "Sharlee Glenn" Subject: Re: [AML] Annual Movie Tabulation I've seen more movies in the past couple of months than I usually watch in a whole year. Most of them were ho-hum--"Harry Potter" (of course, I don't even like the books all that much), "Princess Dairies" (way too derivative and unorginal), "The Other Side of Heaven" (I already posted my luke-warm response to this one). I didn't like "Lord of the Rings" either (though my response was hardly ho-hum). It is a masterful piece of filmmaking, but I felt pummelled by it. Most of the violence is gratuitous and purely "hollywood" in my opinion. I could have done with a lot less Orc bashing and a lot more philosophical/thematic development. I loved "Monsters, Inc.," "Chocolat," and "Ma and Pa Kettle Go To Town" (my kids' choice for New Year's Eve viewing). But the best thing I saw (I'm way behind times on this one, I know) was "The Spitfire Grill." It's a quiet, beautifully filmed and marvelously acted little film that took honors at the Sundance Festival several years ago. I found it on video at Blockbuster (in Pleasant Grove). I'm looking forward to seeing "The Royal Tenebaums," "In The Bedroom," "Amelie," and, especially, the newly released "Beauty and the Beast: Special Edition." Sharlee Glenn glennsj@inet-1.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 13:48:00 -0800 From: "jana" Subject: Re: [AML] Reading Programs Pick up a copy of Clifton Fadiman's _Lifetime Reading Plan_. Jana Remy Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:06:21 -0800 From: Julie Kirk Subject: Re: [AML] Annual Movie Tabulation > >But the best movie I actually saw was Moulin Rouge. Utterly amazing, >endlessly inventive, unabashedly sentimental, completely over the top and >excessive. I loved it. > >Eric Samuelsen > > >I'm glad to see that someone else liked it. In the theater, I was utterly >bombarded with light, music, and neon. It wasn't until I was driving home >that the part of my brain that judges things shook itself awake from its >sensory overload and told me, "Hey, that was a work of genius." Then I kind >of went, "Huh," and thought about it some more, and realized "That was >REALLY a work of SUPREME genius." But it took me a while to come to that >conclusion. > > >Amy > > These feedbacks are interesting to me - I haven't seen the movie yet. I thought the trailers before it came out looked alright, and thought I might. Then my 17 year old daughter said some of her friends from school saw it and they said there was so much sex in it it was overwhelming (remember, this is coming from a 17 year old - but it did make me kind of think I wouldn't bother). So, maybe I'll see it at some point. But what did you guys think? What I mean is, did you think the merit outweighed the sex scenes, or do you think the 17 year olds overreacted. Do you think that maybe as adults we are so used to seeing (or doing!) these things that you were desensitized? Was it all an overreaction? I have to admit, it was the first time I heard that observation from teenagers, and non-LDS ones at that, so I did listen to it. Living here in "Babylon" these kids get exposed to alot as it is. I will also admit that I am asking for a discussion on a movie I still have not seen. I know these questions come up alot on the list, but it seems that, as much as this point is rehashed, I still find some new angle to think about it from at each reintroduction. Julie - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 20:31:21 -0600 From: "Kumiko" Subject: [AML] Virginia BAKER, "Rachel's Wedding" (Review) Title: "Rachel's Wedding" By: Virginia Ellen Baker The year's Grand Prize story in the annual Writers of the Future Contest. In: _L. Ron Hubbard Presents Writers of the Future, Vol. 5_, edited by Algis Budrys. Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, 1989 Reviewed by Preston Hunter Described most simply, "Rachel's Wedding" presents a clash between tradition and modernism as a group of Orthodox Hasidic Jews arrive on Solomon's Row, an asteroid inhabited only by liberal Jewish kibbutzim. That alone would be ample material for an interesting story. But Baker has packed this award-winning story with a score of other interesting ideas, technologies, settings, and characters, turning what might have been a routine compare-and-contrast fiction exercise into a moment of time captured from a fictional future which seems completely real. There is easily enough material here for an entire novel, but through Baker's expert pacing the story never feels crowded or confusing The Jewish aspect alone should make "Rachel's Wedding" of interest to many readers, especially those who like see real world religious cultures explored in fiction. All of the major divisions in real world Judaism are represented: conservative/liberal, Orthodox/Reform, Ashkenazi/Sephardim. Even the universal male/female and parent/child dichotomies are explored in this story of conflict and accommodation. One story-telling choice which greatly contributes to the power of "Rachel's Wedding" is the use of multiple viewpoints: the narrative voice switches between four different characters: two of the liberal kibbutzim and two Orthodox, two men and two women. This is done so naturally that only in retrospect did I realize the perfect balance this provided to the story. The multiple viewpoints never seemed gimmicky or forced. All characters in this story are Jewish, yet the diversity they represent is far more complex and interesting than the shallow (melanin-centric) "diversity" seen on a typical contemporary TV show with a 3-whites-2-blacks-one-asian-or-hispanic-one-gay cast where everybody thinks exactly the same. Baker's characters highlight differences that matter, and how those differences affect individuals and the community. Some of the most pronounced differences are between people of apparently identical backgrounds, such as the two Hasidic leaders, Rebbe Meyer and Rebbe Poul. The concept of an ethnic/religious group establishing an off-planet colony for itself in the near future has been dealt with frequently in science fiction. Indeed, Dean Ing's _Systemic Shock_ tells of Jewish colonization of artificial Earth satellites in the aftermath of armed conflict in the Middle East, a premise similar in many ways that used by Baker. As with Ing's novel, the war and the establishment of the colony are only background material to the main story. Mike Resnick's award-winning Kikuyu stories (now collected in _Kirinyaga_) may be one of the best known examples of ethnic/religious colonization of artificial satellites. Interestingly, Resnick was a Jewish writer writing about African tribal religion. Baker is a Latter-day Saint writer writing about Jewish religion. Yet in both cases, the authors' treatments of their subject material are so informed and accurate that it's hard to believe the writers were outsiders. In both cases, the writers seem to have spent considerable time among the people they are writing about, and have done excellent research. [Although, according to Greenberg, Resnick has never been to Africa.] M. Shayne Bell's _Inuit_ is another example of this premise. While it has nothing to do with Baker's story, it's interesting to note that some excellent science fiction about Latter-day Saint colonization has been written by Jewish writers: Avram Davidson and Cynthia Goldstone's "Pebble in Time", Harry Turtledove's _How Few Remain_ and Larry Niven's _The Gripping Hand_ are three example that come to mind. (Even Robert Silverberg's _A Time of Changes_ could fit into this category.) So Baker's "Rachel's Wedding" provides a certain sort of symmetry. "Rachel's Wedding" illustrates the Chaim Potok notion (recently championed by Richard Dutcher) that fiction can actually be more _universally_ authentic as it is _more_ "inside" -- more specifically about an _actual_ culture rather than about artificially non-denominational/non-ethnic "generic" characters who belong to no identifiable community. Clearly, I liked the cultural ingredients used to create "Rachel's Wedding." The mix of cultures and believable characters was essentially what the story was about. Most of the plot grew organically from these elements and it is almost superfluous to describe it in much detail. The wedding referred to in the title is declared by the staunchly conservative Rebbe Poul, who orders the Hasidic maiden Rachel to marry a much older Hasidic bachelor. Rachel, alas, has already developed feelings for Jacob, one of the leaders of the kibbutzim. This is classic "Romeo and Juliet" stuff, sure, but the resulting emotions and resolutions are so powerfully portrayed that even this aspect of the story seems fresh and original. There is a subplot involving the medical and mental meltdown of Saul, a newly arrived Hasidic Jew who had undergone an illegal computer chip grafting process in Mexico before coming to the satellite. The chip is found to be one manufactured on the satellite by the kibbutzim themselves, although they had no idea their product was being used for such purposes. Although an interesting part of the plot, and perhaps necessary to make this truly a science fiction story and not just an ethnic story set in space, this is the only plot element which seems somehow "grafted on" -- not arising purely from the culture clash. "Rachel's Wedding" is a well told, memorable story unafraid to delve deeply and sympathetically into interesting religious cultures. It is not surprising that this won the Grand Prize in the Writers of the Future contest -- chosen as first among the year's best science fiction by new writers. What _is_ surprising is that this story hasn't been subsequently anthologized, but hopefully that will change. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 01:20:52 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] Re: Requesting Changes Without Contract (was: Covenant...) Communications Press Release 7Jan02 US UT Prov I4 Jeffrey Savage wrote: > Actually that is very common. Agents often will ask a first time writer to > rewrite something before they send it out. I know of several authors whose > first submissions showed promise but required rewriting before they were > publishable. No, no, no. Agents are a very different animal from a publisher. I'm talking the publisher, not an agent. Todd Petersen wrote: > In the literary magazine and academic world this is very common. It is > also common with literary agents. It is also happens directly with > editors, but not all that much. Well, again, agents are not publishers, and as far as literary or academic periodicals--who cares? I'm talking about real publishers producing real books that real people will buy and read and make real authors rich (hopefully). Or maybe it's just that the science fiction publishers, with whom I am most familiar, are more ethical than mainstream publishers (snicker). - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 07:53:03 -0700 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Life in Mormon Culture Jerry, this is such good stuff. You and Kathy could write novels about your experiences. The excerpt about the bishop with the lapels is the kind of thing that makes good novels! Truly, I am impressed with these experiences. And the question "Do we know what we have?" is the one I would like to see answered and touted to the world! Your paragraph about the yearning of Joseph Smith is really amazing. THAT is the feeling I'd like to see come through literature! Marilyn Brown - ----- Original Message ----- From: Jerry Tyner Since my wife was so offended for not being verbal about her post I'm going to respond to it here. [snip] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 11:55:23 -0700 From: Kathy Fowkes Subject: Re: [AML] Changes over Time (was: Life in Mormon Culture) Tom, thank you. you're absolutely right. In fact, I debunked for my children just a couple of weeks ago the fallacy they've been "taught" in sunday school or primary or wherever that Jesus didn't drink wine - that in fact it was grape juice! It does blow me away, I must admit, when members can't reconcile the current doctrine regarding alcoholic drinks with the fact that other than the last 150 years or so, it was just fine and dandy to drink alcohol in moderation. Continuing revelation is one of the most important keys to this living, changing church of ours. Thank you again for the reminder. My mind was on particular doctrines, and not seeing the whole picture when I wrote that. Kathy F. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 12:06:59 -0700 (MST) From: Margaret Blair Young Subject: Re: [AML] Must-Read Lists This question, or a similar one, was posed to English professors at BYU several years ago. (They are, of course, the definitive experts on the subject, so their votes count double.) The two books which topped the list were Dostoevsky's _The Brothers Karamazov_ and George Eliot's _Middlemarch_. _The Brothers Karamazov_ was my life-changing book. I even tried to do a version of "The Grand Inquisitor" for my Mask Club directing assignment when I was a theater major. It is interesting that the Russians seem to top our lists--from Tolstoy to Dostoevsky. For me, the huge draw of Russian literature is the PASSION of it. And it's interesting that Russians are true readers. My folks noted, during their various stays in Russia, that Russians are almost always reading--on subways, buses, etc--and not tabloid magazines, but the classics. But a Russian friend of mine told me she hoped I didn't judge Russian people by Russian literature. She found the literary characters to be "grotesque" and assured me Russian people themselves are not quite so huge or weepy. Well, we Mormons could use some huge and passionate characters in our writing, couldn't we--where we are drawn in not only by the plotline but by the energy of the writing, the ambiguities of beautifully drawn characters, and the complexities they face in their faith and in their lives. We try far too hard to make things easy, to resolve universal difficulties (as I have said in other venues) "in a prayer and a paragraph." I wonder if the issue of PASSION (or lack of it) has something to do with whether or not Church is boring--especially in Utah. [Margaret Young] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 13:46:43 -0700 From: Kathy Fowkes Subject: Re: [AML] Life in Mormon Culture On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 01:03:40 -0700 "D. Michael Martindale" writes: Or maybe what > I'm > really saying is that they'd be better off raised outside of Utah > than > in. I've been in Utah so long now than I don't know how much of the > goofiness I see is Utah-based or time-based. > > I do know that the church of my youth offered me much more than the > church of my children's youth is offering them. > > -- > D. Michael Martindale > dmichael@wwno.com Steve Perry said: How do we help ourselves, our children, our families, our friends, Romans, and countrymen make that connection to the unseen but real? In reference to Marvin's question about our youth and our art -- I think our literature, movies, and music can help us as individuals bridge the gap between the tangible reality and inperfect physical necessity of "The Church" and the spiritual wonder and truth that is the eternal reality and spiritual connection above, behind, and all around it. I don't think we have to do it in moralistic tales either. If we, as makers of art, are familiar with and suffused with the true spiritual essence, can anything project we touch help but be infused with it as well? I see what Michael sees here in AZ, too, but not as bad as I hear Utah is. Regardless, I still think it has more to do with the people, rather than the church policies and procedures. I have loved the LDS books that poke fun at our Mormon culture, especially Utah culture, like _Paradise Vue_, but I think Steve's right -- we need a spiritual revival.of sorts. That wonder and truth is what I feel in my heart and have tried to share with my children. I think Steve has hit on the very thing that keeps the growing up in the church from being boring. In Eliza R. Snow's day she saw the same problems with the youth of her day, and saw a need for "retrenchment". Thus the Mutual Improvement Society (? I think it was called?) was born. I have heard that a prominent female general authority whose name I won't mention because I don't know if this is in print or not, but I have heard that she calls the Relief Society a sleeping giant. I loved the phrase because it is what I have felt for a long time now. There is so much more we could be doing, if we would just awake and arise from the sleep we are in. I have felt a great deal of pain and concern for the women of the church. This internet stuff has made me see the women of the church in a much more global sense, and the unbelievable pain and suffering I hear about from my sisters around the world is overwhelming to me. The amount of women who are being diagnosed as clinically depressed and are being put on Prozac or some other antidepressant is in record numbers as they try to cope with their trials and pain, with only the hope of just surviving and enduring. I think a big reason for the lack of, I don't know, luster? in the members of the church is that the vast majority of the women and men of the church are forgetting who we are, if we ever really knew. Perhaps we just aren't believing it on a deep enough level. We say the words, but we aren't believing them. One of my favorite lds music CDs is Steve's _From Cumorah's Hill_. I love it, I love what it says so simply and directly. My favorite song of all on it is "I Never Stand Alone." The line, "I stand with Nephi and Moroni, and Abinadi who testified in flames, and saints through the ages, stalwart and faithful, leading me, telling me I never stand alone." Let's face it. First, what Steve sings here is true. We do stand with the prophets and apostles and saints when we stand with God. And they stand with us. It's a lot more literal than many think. In his post Steve mentions the fact that the earthly church is really the individual, the Savior, and God, and these individuals who all come together to worship, to support and to strengthen one another become the body of Christ. Steve's song is a reminder to me that the heavenly church is the same thing, and that we are one with those who've gone before us and those who are coming after us as we stand with God. That oneness is not only real for when we depart this life, but real right here and now if we want it. Like Steve said, the unseen is as real as the seen. Thom mentions the difference in understanding the early saints had, compared to what we have today. He is so right. So much understanding has been lost or muted. The early saints knew what Steve referred to and so much more. I've been reading a lot, every chance I get, about the prophet Joseph's teachings. My trip to Nauvoo and Adam Ondi Ahman has infused my husband and I and those with whom we traveled with a new spirit, a rebirth regarding our testimonies of Jesus Christ and this church of Steve's definition. For me it is so strong I can hardly contain it at times. I want so much to share what I feel in my heart about the work of God that is going forward, and how important each individual in the church is to that work; how important each individual is in the sight of God, and how greatly He disires us to increase our faith in Him, in the Savior, the atonement, and ourselves. We have so much work to do, and those on the list have such fabulous opportunities to share and infuse others with the exciting message of the Gospel because of their gifts and talents. And I agree with Steve completely - it doesn't have to be with moralistic tales at all. Those who are good at humor get to open hearts with laughter--laughter is so healing to a troubled heart! Those who are good at reaching in and touching the soul with heartwrenching conflict can bring their readers to a greater awareness of God and themselves and their own weaknesses, as well as show by the example of their characters the importance of compassion, patience, long-suffering, faith, determination to succeed at all costs, etc. etc. Those who create music get to open the heart to the whisperings of the Spirit. The power of the written word, the spoken word, and of music is staggering. What we could accomplish, each of us in our own areas of interest and talent, when we really begin to see who we are, from whom we come, and whatnd who awaits us on the other side of that veil! What influence for good we could have. I wish I could just shout to everyone that we are missing the big picture in a really big way. We focus on programs and the letter of the law, and totally forget the Spirit of all of this that we are a part of. We aren't finite people going about living in just a physical world. We are sons and daughters of God, divine in our own right. The missionary training manual actually says, "You were probably among the noble and great ones." And we are. I think it was Eric (?) who essentially was pondering the extent of the spiritual world's effect on our work as writers and creators of art. I don't think I responded to that thread, I can't remember. But I KNOW both from experience, from answers to prayer, and from priesthood blessings that, while maybe we haven't written all that we will/have here before, we DO receive far more divine and angelic help and inspiration than we are aware of. The Heavenly church is *very* interested in what we are doing down here. There's a synergy that the earthly church and the heavenly church can achieve if we would but catch the vision of it! And we, as artists and creators, have a unique mission to write the words and the music that come from the light of heaven, and spread that light around the world. There is so much darkness and confusion, and we have so much light at our fingertips that the Lord wants to give us to share. Light that will show to so many the way Home. The creative process is so spiritual anyway. We talk of muses, and are probably entertaining angels unaware. Writers and artists of other faiths have something that too many of us do not -- They aren't afraid to express that testimony in song and the written word. They acknowledge that their muse is God. We as a church have gone so far in the direction of keeping spiritual experiences secret instead of just sacred that we are even keeping them secret to ourselves, denying what we feel and experience as real. Miracles happen every day. Angels attend when we are trying to use our talents to glorify God in some way, and seek to inspire us to greater heights. I know it, even though most of the time we are unaware, and call it "the muse." I say "we" because I know I need to "get the Spirit of the Lord" more, as the prophet Joseph said the Brigham Young in a vision, and so I'm assuming others here need it too. Are we ever in tune enough? :-) I've started to write again, and for perhaps the first time I am writing seriously. My focus and interest has always been the women of the church, and it is to them that I'm writing my story of struggle with childhood molestation and more than a decade of clinical depression (including being suicidal at times, hating myself so much that I wanted more than anything to cease to exist). I must tell people that it is possible--I'm living proof--that we don't have to just cope and survive; we can heal and live joyfully and at peace with ourselves, those who've harmed us, and most of all with our loved ones and God. It can be done because I did it. I triumphed over depression, and others can to. Already as I have begun I have been aware that at times I am not alone as I write. I don't know how it's going to turn out, or how long that's going to take, but I can't not try to share what I have learned, and the joy that is in my heart. That's my area, my mission with writing. It's what I'm driven to do, come h*ll or high water, as my mother used to say :-). So many of you have shared your light with me and so many others. There's a saying that 20 people praying to God can move mountains. Maybe it's time we all added to our prayers a special supplication for the editors and publishers of LDS works to see the vision of what we are trying to do. Maybe we can make a difference for people as they seek to live happily as members of the church. Maybe we can help others see how exciting and alive it can be again, and demonstrate through our works that this is a spiritual church, not merely a physical one. Even when appropriate help others open their hearts to feel the Spirit witness to them that God lives, that Jesus Christ lives, and the church lives, too. Zion is the pure in heart. A scripture just came to mind that I'd like to add -- if your eye be single to the glory of God, then your whole being shall be filled with light. Paraphrased. If we can through our work as writers and artists help others see the glory of God, then we really can help them feel that light of God in their own souls. We really will be sharing God's light. It's what we are called to do. What else our our gifts and talents for, but to help our brothers and sisters come unto Christ? Sorry to ramble. Kathy Fowkes kathy_f@juno.com ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #573 ******************************