From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #56 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 Saturday, May 17 2003 Volume 02 : Number 056 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 07:09:22 -0600 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Bookbinding I sent these two note directly to Benson. I guess I should have sent them to the list. About bookbinding: My wife bought a book for me a few year ago (I only just barely lent it to my nice or I'd give you the exact title) that's really good. I think it's called "Hand Bookbinding." It's (I think) by Dover Press. It's about 8 1/2 x 11 and has a light blue cover. My wife got it from Amazon.com. A good sorce of supplies is Talasonline.com (I think). Book binding is a curious art. It's so easy when you start out. It becomes almost impossible after a few years. write to me if you have questions. The size of the book is a big deal and the dimentions of the finished page. What size run are you thinking of? - --AND-- I'm on the web looking for a machine that would fold concertinas for me. I went onto amazon.com to see if that book about bookbinding was there. It's called "Hand Bookbinding" by Aldren A. Watson. It costs $30.00. It's an excellent book, though. It will show you how to make your own tools. There are a lot of tools for book binding that are not absolutely necessary. You can get by with just a needles and thread, a pot of glue and something to cut the boards for the cover. "Davey" board is usually used for covers. It is kind of expensive and it's really hard to cut. I used to cut it with a utility knife, making several passes to get one cut, but I could never get a square cover board. Finally, I bought a small board cutter for about $400. I absolutely love it. and if you're planning to bind a run of any size it's that only way. I've done several runs of 20-30 books. It's the only way to go if you are going to use davey board. I have toyed with the idea of using cheap wall paneling for cover boards. You could cut that on a table saw. I have use paneling for covers before and the only difference is it's a little stiffer. Good Luck, send me a note and tell me how it goes. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 07:54:38 -0500 From: "Linda Kimball" Subject: Re: [AML] Biblical Language For what they're worth, here are my musings from a while back about the Thee and Thou business. Hopefully this link will work - it should take you to my essay called "Prayer Lingo.": http://www.beliefnet.com/frameset.asp?pageLoc=/story/63/story_6377_1.html&boardID=10493 This appears in www.beliefnet.com. Linda in Evanston, IL - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 08:20:43 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] Mormon Horror >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com >[mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Lisa Tait >The problem with horror is that it seems to be focused on the >horror--the evil. There may be an underlying theme or message >that has an explicit moral to it--faith is stronger than >doubt--or it may want to provoke us to think about matters of >faith--is my faith stronger than my doubt? But horror also >(and I might argue primarily) functions to scare us--it's >after a certain effect. And I would argue that the effect >mostly negates the morality underneath it. Not exactly true. True horror is about as black and white a literature there is. Evil is clearly evil and good is clearly good. Stephen King write morality tales. The bad guys always get it in the end. If you want a form of literature that teaches the basic virtues of life, then you want horror. Read the Book of Revelation if you want the scare of your life. But how does it end. The greatest happy ending in the history of spiritual writing. Thom - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 09:37:38 -0500 From: "Linda Kimball" Subject: Re: [AML] Modernizing Shakespeare A little folderol on this topic....The following is from the Washington Post Style Invitational Contest that asks writers to submit "instructions" for something (anything), but written in the style of a famous person. The winning entry, contributed by Jeff Brechlin of Potomac Falls, was "The Hokey Pokey" by William Shakespeare: O proud left foot, that ventures quick within Then soon upon a backward journey lithe. Anon, once more the gesture, then begin: Command sinistral pedestal to writhe. Commence thou then the fervid Hokey-Poke, Mad gyration, hips in wanton swirl. To spin! a wilde release from Heaven's yoke. Blessid dervish! Surely canst go, girl. The Hoke, the Poke -- banish now thy doubt Verily, I say, 'tis what it's all about. Barbara Hume proposed a different challenge: "It would be interesting to choose a passage from Shakespeare and have various list members take a stab at rendering it into modern prose. Not only would it be a lot of fun and very enlightening, but I think it would increase our appreciation for the Bard. I'll bet the various interpretations would be quite different from each other." I look forward to reading the responses. Linda - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:23:13 -0400 From: "Jamie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Modernizing Shakespeare >It would be interesting to choose a passage from Shakespeare and have=20 >various list members take a stab at rendering it into modern prose. Not only would= =20 it be a lot of fun and very enlightening, but I think it would increase our appreciation for the Bard. I'll bet the various interpretations would be=20 quite different from each other. > >barbara hume > >[MOD: Okay, I'll formalize it...Anyone up to the challenge?] > I wrote "Five-Minute Much Ado" a while ago for a website called Five-Minute= =20 Voyager that you can find at this address: http://3sygma.com/fiveminute/. = =20 There, you will find "fivers" of all things sci-fi along with some=20 Shakespeare, but not this one. My fiver is "in process", as it has been for= =20 a year now. It's not exactly what you asked for, but it's what I have to=20 offer. ~Jamie Laulusa Five-Minute Much Ado [At Leanoto=92s house] Messenger: Extra! Extra! Don Pedro won whichever border skirmish it was=20 this week, and if anyone died they weren=92t anyone we need to care about. He=92= s bringing his entourage here so y=92all can marry off any extra daughters you= =20 got lying around. Beatrice: Do you know Benedick? Messenger: Why, do you like him? Beatrice: No. *** Benedick: I hate women. Beatrice: I hate men more. Benedick: Do not Beatrice: Do too. Benedick: Do not Beatrice: Do too. Don Pedro: We=92ll stay for a month. I like this place. Leanato: We like all of you, too, even your brother, Don Jon. Don Pedro: Jon, what do we say to the nice man? Don Jon: =91nk you. *** Claudio: Whoa, that Hero is such a babe. I want to marry her. Benedick: What, are you crazy? Claudio: Don Pedro, can I marry Hero? Please? Pretty Please? Don Pedro: Go ahead. Hey, tell you what, I=92ll even help you. Claudio: Yipee-skipee! Borachio: Ooo, Don Jon=92s gonna have fun with this. *** Don Jon: I hate people! All of them! Especially my brother! Borachio: Hey, DJ, your brother hooking Hero and Claudio up tonight. If we= =20 mess things up, it=92ll make him mad. Don Jon: Oh goody! [At the masque] Beatrice: Benedick is so stupid! Benedick (in disguise): I am n=97I mean=97I=92ll tell him you said so. Beatrice: Suuure you will. *** Don Jon: Claudio, you are such a sucker. Ol=92 DP is planning on marrying= =20 Hero himself. Benedick: Beatrice called me stupid! Claudio: I think I=92m gonna cry. Benedick: It wasn=92t that big a deal. *** Don Pedro: What=92s the matter Claudio? Claudio: Nothing. Don Pedro: No, really. Claudio: Nothing Beatrice: He=92s pouting. Don Pedro: Well, I don=92t know why, =91cause betrothed people should be= happy. You=92re going to marry Hero. Claudio: Oh wow. Hero: I love you, Claudio. Claudio: I love you, Hero. Bea: Ugh, I can=92t stand the mushy stuff. Don Pedro: Will you marry me, Beatrice. Beatrice: No. Don Pedro: Can I set you up with Benedick then? Hero: Oo! Oo! I want to help! *** Don Jon: My evil plans foiled! Borachio: I=92ve got another idea, and since it involves me making out with Margaret, I like it a lot better than the last one. Don Jon: Well, just as long as it works. *** [In the gardens] Don Pedro: OH WOW! You mean BEATRICE is in LOVE with BENEDICK?! Leanato: Yup. DON PEDRO: OH WOW! Benedick (in hiding): Eep! *** Ursula: OH WOW! You mean BENEDICK is in LOVE with BEATRICE?! Hero: Yup. Ursula: OH WOW! Beatrice (in hiding): Eep! [Outside Hero=92s Window] Don Jon: Said the Bad Guy to poor Claudio Do you see what I see? In the window there, Claudio? Do you see what I see? Don Pedro: Gasp! It=92s Hero sucking face with Borachio! Claudio: I think I=92m gonna cry. *** [Somewhere else] Night Watch: We are the Night Watch The mighty mighty night Watch Everywhere we go People wanna know=85 Dogberry: OK, men, you keep watch here and wait for Evil Miscreants, like,= =20 I dunno, Borachio confessing to defiling Hero=92s honor as a maid. Then we=20 promptly fail to tell anyone until Claudio=92s denounced her and Leanato is forced to= =20 kill her. Watchman #1: Hey, it=92d be a short play otherwise. *** Borachio and Conrad: Hee-hee, whisper-whisper Nightwatch: Gotcha! Borachio: Crap. *** [At the Wedding] Friar: Do you, Claud=97 Claudio: No. Friar: I haven=92t gotten there yet. Claudio: I don=92t want her anymore. Hero: I think I=92m gonna cry. Claudio: You=92re such a ho. Besides, Hero is a dumb name for a girl. = Let=92s=20 go. Leanato: Crap, that means I have to kill Hero. Friar: Let=92s not and say we did. Benedick: =85Hey, that=92s a good idea. Leanato: I get it. If we say she=92s dead, and then can prove her= innocence,=20 then Claudio will be sorry and won=92t mind that we didn=92t kill her. What do= we do first? Friar: Clear the stage so Beatrice and Benedick can swear undying love to=20 each other under the misguided impression that the other thought of it first. Benedick: I love you, Beatrice. Beatrice: Good, kill Claudio. Benedick: Do I have to? *** [Somewhere else] Conrad: You=92re an ass. Dogberry: He called me ass! Sexton: Hero=92s dead. Dogberry: He called me ass! Watchman: Does that mean we can tell people now? Dogberry: He called me ass! *** Leanato: You made me kill my daughter, and now I=92m going to kill you. Claudio: Right. You and what army? Leanato: Grr! Claudio: Hey, Benedick, those stupid old guys threatened to kill me. Ha-ha. Ben: I=92m going to help them. Claudio: Eep. *** Dogberry: Borachio has confessed that it wasn=92t Hero at the window at all,= =20 and Conrad called me ass, it was Margaret, so you all went and killed her for nothing, and don't forget I'm an ass Watchman #2: No, I don't think we'll be forgetting that anytime soon. Leanato: I hope you=92re very ashamed of yourself. As punishment you must= =20 marry Hero=92s cousin who looks, acts and talks exactly like her. In fact, for= all=20 the character development Hero got, you probably won=92t be able to tell the difference. Claudio: And this is supposed to be a punishment? *** Benedick: Man, this poem sucks. Does =93lady=94 even rhyme with =93baby=94? Beatrice: Hey you. Benedick: Kiss me. Beatrice: No. Benedick: Awww.. Beatrice: Oh well, if you insist. Ursula: Yea! Don Jon=92s Evil Plot is revealed and Hero is alive again! Benedick: Hello, we were kissing. *** Don Pedro: Sniffle Claudio: Wah! I wish Hero were still alive. Hero: Sic! Claudio: Hero! (Claudio and Hero make kissy faces) Benedick: Do you love me Beatrice. Beatrice: I don=92t think so. Do you love me? Benedick: I don=92t think so. Beatrice: Well, it was a nice thought. Let=92s be friends. Benedick: Works for me. Claudio: Except I have this poem I stole from his pocket, and it says he=20 loves her. Benedick: Dang it! Hero: And I have a letter from Beatrice that says she loves him. Beatrice: Dang it! Benedick: Alright, alright, let=92s get married. Beatrice: Oh, OK. Messenger: Hey, we caught Don Jon! Benedick: He=92s always spoiling our fun. Take him away and let=92s dance! Crowd: Yea! The End _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.=20 http://join.msn.com/?page=3Dfeatures/junkmail - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 10:57:15 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] STANSFIELD, _The Gable Faces East_ Andrew Hall wrote: > > A connection between this Stansfield novel and the Evans book > that stands out in my mind is the sexless night spent in each > other's arms. Especially since you say the charachters > treated it as some kind of proof of their love for each other > while still remaining true to something or another. I can > see that being a relatively attractive fantasy to young > people with both romance and personal worthiness on their > minds, and I would certainly not like to see it encouraged to > the youth of the Church in novels. > I bet the DB people were thinking the same thing. > I'd bet this was the scene that caused the book's removal from > the DB shelves. Could be, could be. But that begs the question, why didn't they just say so? Why didn't they spell it out as clearly as you did? The fact that they obfuscated with dubious reasons and suddenly decided to go on a pogrom of all titles makes me think otherwise. - -- 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: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:44:30 -0600 From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Goal of Writing ___ Jonathan ___ | I'll agree that one mark of a good writer is to know one's | audience and adjust one's writing to them. But there are | limits to that. ___ Since we've been discussing this point in various threads but this is a good point. *None* of us fully knows our audience. We make guesses and gauge our communication accordingly. Fortunately in speech (and to a lesser extent email) we have some feedback that lets us explain or rework things. Art typically doesn't have this mechanism. It often means that for every good work by an artist there are hundreds or thousands of false starts, failed projects, and other "learning" endeavors. Often the audience discovers art rather than art discovering the audience. Lots of works are "ahead of their time" or simply never get noticed. So it is an imperfect business. So just to clarify I've *not* been saying that knowing ones audience is easy or always even possible. Typically the audience doesn't even know themselves. We have all these hidden desires, intents, and the like. Often we don't even know we like something until we see it. (Or taste it, or hear it...) It's a kind of societal collective unconsciousness that makes art so interesting. In a sense art of any kind can be a mirror in which we see parts of ourselves or our society we never noticed before. Unfortunately for every work that does this there are thousands upon thousands that don't. And rarely does the artist know in advance when they've achieved their ends. Clark Goble - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 01:40:29 -0700 From: "Jongiorgi Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Modernizing Shakespeare Barbara Hume ask about Modernizing Shakespeare. Jonathan asks: Anyone up to the challenge? Probably not, but here goes for grins: We've just come through a time that sucked. It was like a cold day in hell. Now everything is looking up. Things are going pretty well. All thanks to this damn Prince here, this kid from that house called York. Now people are walking around town with funky hats on. Vivid lids. Instead of packing heat around in our waist-bands, our guns are mounted up on the walls. 'Stead of sirens, we've got, "How you doin' Hoss?"; "Hey, baby -- How YOU doin'?" Gang-banging, rap-battle clangin' war: that's out. Now, instead of hoppin' up front in our cars and cruising the streets gunnin' for someone, Blood's is slippin' into the back seat to boff their very finest cherry sweets to the rhythm of the bass-line. You dig? 'Cept for ME. Look at me. What do you see? I'm not made for slippin' into back seats. You see that, no? I'm no Cuba Gooding. Ain't no Denzel. I'm not built or stacked or ripped or cut or chiseled or fine, so fine. I was cheated. And no gym time gonna fix these twisted chops to sweet licks. The chicks see that trick for truth pretty quick. You get it, Slick? I'm TICKED! I'm so pissed at Mother Nature I could spit! Look what that bitch did to me! The body I'm stuck with's so damn ugly, speaking of bitches, I walk by, even the DOGS is left in stitches! You dig? I'm not having a good time, in some back seat, sipping wine. Nobody's even look at twisted me... Unless that is, I go downtown to a rap battle, and standing in the hot lights Of those blaring spot lights I cant and ramp about my own deformity To everybody's mocking, hawking glee. You see? So, catch this. If I can't be a lover, I'm gonna be a fighter And piss in the wind of your summer time. You just watch me. See if I don't. I'm gonna hate this time and everybody in it. That prince of York's head's gonna spin it. You'll watch me do it and while I do it, you'll grin it. Of that I guarantee. You dig? >From "Richard 313" Jongiorgi Enos - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 14:37:03 -0600 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: [AML] Alternative Press (was Mormon Horror) > Jongiorgi Enos wrote: > > > How do we get the writings of our more fringe artists ("fringe" used in the > > nicest possible way) OUT into the market? How do we become leaders with a > > readership of a couple of dozen? Or, how can we expand that readership to a > > slightly more ubiquitous frame? > > > > Any ideas? > Funny how this keeps coming up. Especially, when someone as highly esteemed as Benson Parkinson half-way proposes the same idea I've had. I've proposed this idea many times, but no one seems interested. Maybe there will be some interest this time. I'm doing a book right now of my great-grandfather's writings, and I think I've just solved the last problem. I propose creating a small press, perhaps called, "AML Books." We could choose a promising manuscript, typeset it, print it and hand bind it. We could do like ten copies. We could put one copy in a box to keep in the garage of the AML President (just in case the are archeologists some time in the future that might be interested in LDS literature at the turn of the 21st century), and we could sell the other copies at the AML convention. The author would retain the copyright, and the proceeds from the sales would be donated to the AML. We could do a Coptic binding which looks really cool and unique. They take a lot longer to do, but they look a lot more dignified than case bindings. Is anyone interested? Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:31:39 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Does Intent Matter? Clark Goble wrote: > That's my point - your examples are using the "ideal" artist.' > There are other less "incompetent moron" variations. They may not use > the proper guage of wire, risking electrical fire. They may not ground > things properly. I could get more technical, but the danger in using > plumbing and electrical examples is that most here haven't done > electrician or plumbing work and so wouldn't understand incompetent real > world examples. After having to replumb some of the work my uncle did > at our cottage, I can certainly think of many examples where things > "worked" but certainly were frustrating for later modifications of the > plumbing. Was your uncle a journeyman plumber? Yes, few artists are perfect. Like few of any other profession. So does that we mean we allow people who know nothing about a profession make the decisions instead of the imperfect professional? > Yes. I recognize that is what you believe. That's why I found your > electrician analogy so interesting. You only bring up the "ideal" who > *does* know what is going on perfectly. Alas in the real world I don't > believe in these sorts of artists and I *don't* believe artists know > their audience better than those who hire them. The world is full of people who think they know the audience better than the professionals. Let's take Anne Perry as an example. Mesmerized by her succes in the mystery genre, for which she is a true professional and knows her audience, she decides she knows what it takes to write a fantasy novel. So she writes "Tathea." And the bulk of the fantasy audience can't stand it. Because Anne Perry doesn't know what she's doing in that genre. Millions of would-be authors think they know the audience and embark to write the Great American Novel. And the vast majority of those efforts are pathetic. Because, like Anne Perry, none of them bothered to learn what the professionals learn. Much as I love to hate Hollywood, there are a tons of people who think they know the movie-going audience better than they, but don't have a clue what it takes to create a successful film. When I decided to write my first screenplay, I (wisely) studied up on the proper technique and format. I discovered something that I already knew as a vague principle, but which was driven home to me at a visceral level as I studied: telling stories in movies is much different than telling them in novels. > I know many, many artists *do* think they know their audience well. I > think this is why many people are so turned off by artists. I hung > around for several years a lot of artists at BYU. That attitude really > got on my nerves after a while. After it led to elitism since those who > *didn't* appreciate art were ignorant. So the "audience" becomes this > self-fulfilling creation. > > The fact that people do criticize art, especially the general public, > *strongly* suggests that artists don't have some privileged notion of > their audience. I take issue with this. What is the artist attempting to do? Maybe he's trying to affect his audience this way, by telling them disturbing stories that make them think. Maybe these reactions are indications he knows his audience very well. But without question there is a wide variation in the competence of artists. Just like every other profession. There are artists who are full of themselves and let their ego get in the way of their professional competence. Just like other professions. So tell me what you think of people who self-diagnose or who represent themselves in court because doctors and lawyers have a wide variation in competence from one practitioner to the next and many of them are full of themselves and irritate their clients? Johnny Cochrane irritates the scrud out of me. I am loaded with criticism of him. And if I am ever charged with murder, I'd love to have him represent me. I assure you, I wouldn't dictate how he did it. This all means you ought to do with artists the same thing you do with any other professional. Your homework. Find things out, get recommendations, check out their previous work. If you're happy with what you learn, hire them. And then step back and trust them do the job you hired them to do. > An other way to state my concern is to ask, "what counts as 'the > results'?" > > For instance if I commission a painting, and I want something done to > inspire people, expecting a realistic genre and I get abstract art, is > that results or the "how?" It seems your use of "results" is rather > vague and ambiguous. Where do *you* draw the line between style and > result? The same way Damon Knight defines science fiction. "Science fiction is whatever I'm pointing at when I say 'That's science fiction.' " The line is wherever I'm pointing when I say, "That's the line." Since art is one of those subjective things, there is no hard-and-fast line. So you do what I already suggested you do. Study the art of the artists you're considering. If you want realism and they do abstract, don't hire them. Make an intelligent choice on who to use and be as clear as you can about the results you want, then go away and let them be the professionals they are. Don't keep coming back and saying "Monson's nose is too big" until finally it doesn't look like Monson at all. (Apparently acknowledging that a General Authority's nose is big is yet another official method of dissing the servants of God.) - -- 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: Tue, 13 May 2003 14:54:24 -0600 From: "Eugene Woodbury" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Horror > "D. Michael Martindale" wrote: > > For me, _Treasure Box_ is Card's worst work. The > > first half is as good as anything he wrote, but the > > second half breaks down into tedious cliches. The > > ending is lifted wholesale from one or more horror movies. I've always thought that Lost Boys would have worked just as well without ostensibly Mormon characters (M. Night Shyamalan made that point), but that Treasure Box failed precisely because it wasn't a "Mormon" horror novel. Although it's impossible not to read Card's Mormonism into the character of the protagonist, the lack of this explicit context in the novel itself denies him justification and strategy for righteous action or reaction. The "traditional" horror novel (which Treasure Box tries to be more than Lost Boys), like the crime novel, presents us with a Manichean view of the universe, which starkly defines the difference between good and evil (a thing that needs defining from time to time). A world that contains devils, the genre suggests, must also contain angels. This is one reason why Catholicism is so often used as the backdrop in horror: sourced reference material. Another reason is that when you're talking about contemporary representations of an eternal struggle, you need institutions and authorities with deep roots to buttress your side of the argument. Note how the ecumenical C.S. Lewis (who was Anglican, but never presented Anglicanism as truer than any other sect) meets Merlin up with Christianity in That Hideous Strength (the best "horror" novel ever written). The morally relative rationalizations of the present just won't do by themselves. And speaking of sourced reference material: can you think of any other television show that gives as much respect to people looking stuff up in books as Buffy and Angel? Mulder and Scully (I loved all the X-Files episodes that brought Scully's nascent Catholicism to the fore) didn't seem to do that much reading, but at least they would always go ask the people who would look the stuff up in their books or secret files, or whatever. Eugene Woodbury - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 15:09:06 -0600 From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: [AML] Finding Meaning in Plays (was: KUSHNER, _Angels in America_) On Wed, 07 May 2003 00:56:05 -0400 "Amelia Parkin" writes: > now for scott (sorry it took so long J): > i agree with scott. if a play cannot communicate through a > performance its message, it probably has failed miserably. > while i agree with scott, i insist that a dramatic text is more > than just instructions to a director and some actors as to > what a performance should include. it is also a TEXT. it is > meant to be read. especially contemporary dramatic > literature. perhaps it will only be read by a director. I will add the actors and designers as well. Which does not much effect your next statement ... > but even such a small audience is one that should give it a > close reading. maybe the average student will not read it > over and over, but i would hope that a director intending to > create, with the help of actors, a performance of the play > would read it very closely indeed. try to understand all the > subtle nuances of the TEXT in order to create an accurate > PERFORMANCE. Exactly my point. This is what I was referring to when I said: "If the interpreters are masters of their craft, this understanding can occur on ONE viewing of the play" This is what the rehearsal process is for. The director and the actors and the designers spend TIME with the text. They analyze it. They dissect it. They tear it apart and put it back together again several times hoping to build a better version each time. Stanislavski thought a full year of rehearsal was just about right before a play was ready for public consumption. > here, scott, i must humbly disagree with you. i've seen many > shakespeare plays. ... one of my favorites is hamlet. i've seen > everything from old movies to new movies; movies i like to ones > i don't; my high school's product, a byu production, and a royal > shakespeare production. they were all powerful. and i've read it > many times. and every single time i left feeling like i had learned > something new from the play that i had not learned from other > performances or readings of the play. this, in my opinion, is > what makes it great. Yes. All great writing has depth. And my guess is if your very first introduction to Hamlet had been a disaster -- say, a performance done by Peter Quince and Bottom and the rest of the crew from Midsummer Night's Dream -- then you would have been hard pressed to return to the play. Except that Hamlet is SO good, that even a group of imbeciles could not destroy the full essence of the thing. You confess above that even the productions you didn't like were powerful. Which tells me that the playwright was skilled enough to make at least some aspect of the message accessible to the interpreters. > i can see a great performance of the same play over and > over and each time have a different experience. Of course. There are two reasons for this NOT happening: The play has no depth or is so obtuse as to render its depth unfathomable; or the interpreters have no brains. Let me make a point about why it DOES happen that way. It is not that the nature of the thing itself has changed -- there is usually very little change in the aspects of any single production of a given play. They rehearse it to find the optimum performance. Once they feel they have found it, there's little point in making changes after that -- but that YOU have changed. Figuratively speaking, your arms have lengthened, enabling you to dig a little deeper into what is being presented. All of this brings up a subject that is really tangential to this discussion, but this seems as good a time and place as any to mention it: Concepts. I fear that I would do very poorly in a graduate directing program anywhere in the US these days. The thrust of these programs seems to be developing a "concept" for your project. In other words, finding a single aspect or category of aspects to draw out of the play and focus on. In other words, finding a critical stance toward the play and explicating it. Hogwash. Shakespeare had it right when he said, "The play's the thing." As a director I dread hearing the phrase, "What's your concept for this production?" "Uh, well, I think we will rehearse the play, and then ... um ... we will perform it." Concepts are limiting in my opinion. I have no problem with having a little fun now and then. I usually enjoy seeing Shakespeare's play set in various times and places. All that really says is that the play is universal in scope. As long as design concepts like that are not prohibitive in terms of what the actors and director can do I have no problem with the idea. I mean, really -- back to the subject at hand -- let's find EVERYTHING we can in the text and find a way to play it all. scott bronson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 18:04:59 -0600 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Biblical Language At 11:30 PM 5/8/03 -0700, you wrote: >Unless you have experienced fluency in a language that uses this >distinctions, it is difficult to understand the heart-stopping moment when >someone with which you have had a "vous" relationship switches to the "tu" >informal address. There is a rush of intimacy, and incredible, vulnerable, >warm feeling. I have been jolted many times in my life by these moments of >SWITCH, like the clicking of a light bulb. It can be an amazing thing. I've >wanted to use such moments in stories, but it is difficult to communicate to >English speaking readers. I might try it, though. It is a great feeling. In the England of two hundred years ago--a period I've been researching heavily--an aristocrat was called by his title. Suppose that your father is the Duke of Lancaster, and you have the courtesy title of the Earl of York. People address him as "your grace" and his intimates address him as Lancaster. You are addressed as "my lord" and your intimates call you "York." This includes your close friends, perhaps even your mother and your wife. When your father dies, you inherit his title and people start addressing your as "your grace" and calling you "Lancaster." What is your actual name? Who knows? If the woman who loves you agrees to call you "Marcus" and allows you to use her Christian name, it creates that same incredible feeling of intimacy you speak of. Of course, if you're a cobbler or a pig farmer, you're known as Tom your whole life. barbara hum - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 18:23:48 -0700 From: Harlow S Clark Subject: [AML] Marden J. Clark, 1916-2003 Toward the end he sailed into an incredible mildness. Goodness existed. He knew that. - --W. H. Auden "Herman Melville" Marden J. Clark was born July 13, 1916 in Morgan, Morgan County, Utah, third son of Ella Jean Boyce and Wallace Rich Clark. That's a sentence no child wants to write because, having written it you have to write the other sentence. He said of his birth, "Grandma Annie doesn't mention it. Neither my father nor my mother made any immediate record of it. So all I have is a birth certificate signed by C. C. R. Pugmire as Physician or Midwife (actually a physician) and by Gilbert Francis as Registrar. It assures me that I was 'born alive' (a great comfort to me!)." His childhood was filled with all the usual joys and hazards of farm life, like swimming in the Weber River and almost drowning once, and nearly getting eaten by a sow when he was two or three, and his father left him in a bucket by the pigpen, and he managed to get into the pen. It was a vivid memory and he carried a scar near his temple throughout life. Marden and his friends were pranksters, according to stories he passed down, hiding the music teacher's car (the poor man didn't think to look in his garage till he got a muffled phone call), stealing his uncle's apples, tipping over a neighbor's outhouse on Halloween. It became a contest of sorts, and the last time they tipped it over she had staked it down with heavy gauge wire so effectively it took them a good long while to get the stakes out, and when the outhouse went over on its door they heard a scream from inside. He wrote a book of stories about all this called _Morgan Triumphs_, Morgan naming both the narrator and the town he lives in. The stories carry an edge of pain they didn't when I heard them growing up, an old man looking back from experience at innocent pranks to find them less innocent than he thought. "Who triumphed over whom?" the narrator asks at the end. Marden drove truck during the Depression and got in quite a few wrecks. (And regaled Robert Penn Warren with stories of the wrecks, slipping and sliding through the snow to the resort where Warren's family stayed while he gave some readings at BYU in early 1976 (possibly 75)). He drove the family car into a light pole shortly after he met Bessie Lloyd Soderborg on a blind date at BYU around November 1939. Elation at a good night kiss had something to do with his not noticing the pole, which should have been across the street from the lane he was driving in. Marden went to Los Angeles in 1940 to work as an airplane mechanic, and ended up a draftsman for Lockheed. By the time his wage rose to 90 cents an hour he had set a date with Bessie and took a bus back to Salt Lake where they were married Oct 25, 1941 in the Salt Lake Temple. They checked into Hotel Temple Square, where one brother each called often enough that the young couple told the desk No More Calls. Marden and Bessie had two children in Los Angeles, Diane and Dennis, and returned to Salt Lake when Marden reported for induction into the army on Bessie's 26th birthday, August 6, 1945, but a doctor looking at his bad back as he walked away from his physical, called him back and sent him home. They went dancing at the Hotel Utah that night, celebrating Bessie's birthday, the bomb and the impending end of the war. He got a Master's degree from BYU in 1948 and a doctorate a few years later from the University of Washington, writing the first full-length study of Robert Penn Warren's fiction. The dissertation was never published, but 20 years later when his son Dennis was studying Library Science at the UW he said it was the most checked-out dissertation in the library. Marden and Bessie settled into BYU and Provo and he taught at BYU while not doing more important things, like following his brother-in-law Lloyd Soderborg's advice, "Why don't you build yourself a home?" ("Me. Who had never managed to pound a nail without bending it.") adding Sherri and Kevin to the family, and growing many gardens. One night while correcting a bunch of Freshman English papers Marden got a call from his father. "Marden, don't be alarmed, but Mother may be dying." He couldn't go back to his papers, and started playing with a phrase he used with his mother, talking about her arthritic fingers. You're just playing a joke I told her. No human bones, these I touch That clutch like talons at my sympathy. At first he felt guilty taking time away from grading papers to write poetry. By the time he retired in 1981 he felt guilty taking time away from his writing to grade papers. A few years after earning his doctorate Marden and Bessie added Harlow and Krista to the family, and then a son-in-law, a daughter-in-law and grandchildren. In the 1970-71 school year he served as Fulbright Professor at the University of Oulu Finland. The family (half-family, by then) stopped at Westfalia Autowerk en route to Helsinki and picked up a WV Vanagon in which they toured and camped across Europe after the school year was over. Harlow and Krista fought for the seat behind the drivers seat, so they could kneel on it and hear Marden's stories about Odysseus and all the others who wandered Greece and the other areas they drove through. Marden was called as a high councillor for a BYU stake in the late 1970s, becoming bishop in 1979. The stake president was released shortly after that, and another about 5 years later. One day Marden was talking to Robert Matthews, his stake president, and mentioned he had been in office 10 years, and Pres. Matthews released him shortly. About a dozen years later Bro. Matthews was the sealer when Marden and Bessie's grandson Colin married Hyun Ju Lee in the American Fork temple. Marden and Bessie loved working with young couples their grandchildren's age, and it helped him move out of academic life. "I miss my students, but I don't miss grading papers at all," he said. Marden was not able to serve a mission. The Depression and the War intervened and by the time he was released as bishop he and Bessie were too old--maybe. But not too old for the Kennedy Center at BYU, who asked them to go to China and teach at the University of Qing Dao. No proselyting, but they could talk religion if people asked, and some did. On retirement in 1981, after a third of a century teaching Robert Frost and other poets of the New England autumn Marden and Bessie and bought a Datsun truck, with a cap and rigged up a bed and porta-potty in the back and headed out to see the leaves that always waited until he was safely mid-semester to show their true colors. (We later hauled many a load of good sheep manure from a former student in that truck.) They traveled also to the Holy Land, India, China, South America, Australia, New Zealand and Africa, every continent but Antarctica, which they passed near on a ship. Marden began writing a religion column for the Daily Herald in Sept. 1994 called Matter Unorganized. The column’s organizing principle was a celebration of nature, people, family, the world generally as witness of God’s love. And there was his garden. He wrote about it, drew sustenance and joy from it, brought his ward members to raid it and taught his children to grow green and living things. The column continued until August 2002, about 400 in all, and, Bessie says, more readers than for anything else he had written. One of his last columns appeared in the movie _The R. M._ when the camera focuses several seconds on the newspaper a character is reading. He was an avid supporter of Mormon literature and culture, and presented many times at Association of Mormon Letters conferences. He was the first person named as a lifetime member of AML. And no matter what you say in between there's always that last sentence you have to write. Marden developed a heart murmur, which found its way into his annual Christmas poem ("my murmuring heart"), and the doctor thought he might have three good years but wouldn't survive heart surgery to repair the leaky valve. He had at least three good years, but Bessie found him asking questions like "Have we had Thanksgiving yet," in December, and he had me plant peas between the raspberries. Something ate the peas as they came up. We did get to plant three good rows of beans, though. The last thing we planted together, he encouraging me as always not to bother with a measuring stick, just put them in the ground. I called my father last Friday, May 9, mildly rainy, and asked if he wanted me to go over and mow the lawn. I would have normally gone anyway, but was hoping to get over to the high school and interview a couple of Lady Viking track stars. Went window shopping to Media Play for Mother's Day presents for Donna and when I got home after 2:00 Donna told me that just after I'd called her she got a call from my parents' neighbors, the Sheffields (the ones we call to send someone over to have my parents put their phone back on the hook when the phone is busy for quite a while straight). An ambulance had come and taken my mother to the hospital. This all happened shortly after I had talked with Dad. My mother has a sore foot and he was trying to help her to the bathroom and she ended up on the floor because her foot hurt too much to stand on it, and he tried to drag her on a rug. Couldn't get her back on her feet. He called the ambulance a little after 1:00 p.m., and asked the Sheffields to call us. When we finally got the babies taken care of that Donna sits, and got to the hospital they were through giving Mom an IV. She has cellulitis, a skin infection. We went home and Sherri and Krista and I made vegetable soup. Dad complained of pain in the pit of his stomach. We thought perhaps it was stress, and talked to the doctor when we took Mom back for her antibiotics. Stephen Biddulph from across the street called us, "What happened?" We had him come over later and give blessings. I anointed and he blessed Dad, so he would feel up to anointing Mom for Steve to bless her. The ER doctors said to try clear liquids, but he couldn't keep anything down. The what-if game says why didn't we get him into the hospital immediately. That might have stopped a bad urinary tract infection. But there was worse. In March when Krista took Dad to the doctor he dropped his drawers and showed the doctor his hernias. Again, not a good candidate for surgery. When Krista took Dad to the ER last night the catscan showed a blocked bowel. Apparently the intestine fell into the hernia. Sherri, and then Valerie (Dennis's wife, staying with Mom) called us just before 10:00 and said he had gone into cardiac arrest and the doctors were working to revive him. We turned off the tv and I grabbed some books to untede the waiting room tedium. (Brothers in Valour by Michael O. Tunnell, Soldier Boys by Dean Hughes and Saints at War--I seem drawn lately to the period just before I was born--and some picture books.) They said he was in room 7 of the ER, but it was empty. I asked about it and the nurse (a social worker, actually) said, "They haven't brought him back yet. Let me take you down there. As we walked down the hall I saw staff wheeling a gurney, sheet pulled up over a head. Bad omen. I caught a glance of silver hair. Worse omen. "Dad didn't make it," Krista said. Marden J. Clark died at 10:20 on May 15, 2002 in Provo Utah, leaving behind a wife of nearly 62 years, 6 children, 20 grandchildren, 8 great grandchildren, two sisters and many friends, students and colleagues throughout the world. There, that wasn't so hard to write was it? Only took all day--between everything else. Like Samuel Clemens riding out on Halley's Comet he left with the lunar eclipse (you can't avoid the poetic implications of that). He was preceded in death by two grandchildren, three brothers and three sisters, five brothers in law (he talked to one or two while getting some medication at the doctor's office and my mother saw an angel with a sword and folded wings), two sisters in law, his and Bessie’s parents and many friends and neighbors. There will be a memorial service Tuesday May 20, 11:00 a.m. at Oak Hills Stake Center. 925 E. North Temple Dr. in Provo. Just north and west of the temple. The family suggests that, in lieu of floral arrangements, people donate to the Food and Care Coalition of Utah Valley (60 North 300 West, Provo, UT 84601), or bring cut flowers from their gardens. Harlow S. Clark - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #56 *****************************