From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #200 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 Monday, October 20 2003 Volume 02 : Number 200 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 19:44:52 -0400 From: "Jamie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Audio books (was: Harry Potter) Darvell Hunt: >>I'm probably going to get the _Lord of the Rings_ unabridged trilogy next.<< The guy who narrates the LotR is muy fabuloso. He sings all the songs and everything. It's great. ~Jamie Laulusa - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 20:58:33 -0600 From: "Jongiorgi Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Pleasantville--is it? Especially interesting since in the book they sleep together and then the Whisperer basically commits suicide by making a stupid mistake -- which he obviously knew better than to do -- and stepping in too close to a mad horse and getting killed. One case where the screenplay was infinitely better than the original source material (at least from a moral "standpoint"). Bravo Redford. Jongiorgi Enos - ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. Michael Martindale" To: Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 5:20 PM Subject: Re: [AML] Pleasantville--is it? > Jared Walters wrote: > > > I didn't see Bridges as pro-adultery. > > "Horse Whisperer" is a movie that set up a situation where adultery > was=20 imminent, but the characters chose the high ground. A rarity > in=20 Hollywood films. > > --=20 > D. Michael Martindale > dmichael@wwno.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 20:39:30 -0700 From: "Clay Whipkey" Subject: Re: [AML] violence >From: "Susan Malmrose" >I've been trying to think about what kind of movie would be acceptable=20 >to me if it included a lot of violence. I know a lot of people say that >Saving Private Ryan is worth seeing because it shows the reality of=20 >war's gruesomeness and horror. My reaction has always been that I don't >need to see someone's guts spilling out on a movie screen to understand >that war is horrible. I totally agree. I can't help but feel that some arguments to support the=20 value of using violence to teach lessons about violence come from=20 motivations to justify the secret enjoyment of watching it. Maybe I'm being=20 too judgmental. I have at times found myself deeply affected by some=20 violent scene, and in a way that is VERY different from the way I have been=20 deeply affected by a spiritual experience. Yet, there is some part of me=20 that kind of enjoyed the dark disruption, but in a way that is acute but fleeting, akin to the rush of certain sins of the flesh. The titilation soon gives way to a cold sadness. Some make the claim that there is some geat value in coming to such=20 realizations about the dark things we are capable of in our worst moments. =20 As if that is some unique opporunity to learn or choose the right path. But=20 I have learned as much from the scriptures, that we are flesh and thus weak,=20 compounded by constant attacks of temptation and [subtle]distortion of=20 truths... and if we don't keep these things in check we are capable of=20 terrible things. Why do people NEED to have those terrible things described=20 and acted out for me in gruesome detail in order to _get_ that? Does=20 Tarantino need to make a running gag out of a young man getting his brains=20 blown out in the back of a car when the bad guys hit a pothole, and the=20 greatest concern is the upholstery... just so he can convey the message that=20 murderers eventually get their come-uppance? It is built in to the=20 spiritual fabric of every of every living person that murder is bad, so why=20 do we have to continually display more of it just to teach that lesson? Are=20 we really in need of such redundancy, or could it be that we really just crave that guilty pleasure of enjoying the violence for the same reason "the=20 world" (which we saints love to criticize) does? Clay Whipkey - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 14:12:59 -0700 (PDT) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: RE: [AML] Pictures in homes - --- "C.S. Bezas" wrote:=20 > And I know there was a flurry after one individual > declared recently he=20 > was leaving this list because he felt it was not=20 > supportive of the=20 > church. People expressed shock he would feel such a=20 > thing. But analyze=20 > it. I believe he may have perceived issues similar=20 > to this discussion as=20 > supporting his claim. When church leaders have=20 > directly declared or=20 > recommended something across the pulpit in General=20 > Conference, it comes=20 > across as unsupportive to argue in contrary motion.=20 > Obviously, choice=20 > exists. But to argue contrary to counsel given by=20 > one of the Quorum of=20 > the Twelve or First Presidency apparently bothered=20 > him enough to "type"=20 > previous discussions as problematic.=20 >=20 > Just my thoughts on both matters. :-) >=20 As you said, the discussion was specifically about pictures of General Authorities in the home, not temples. No leader has ever given any instruction, as far as I am aware, to prominently post large displays of General Authorities in your home. That is an important distinction to be made, and one of the reasons AML-List exists, in my opinion, is to help clarify misunderstandings like this. If someone is offended that the discussion here "seems" to contradict church counsel, they should examine more closely their own perceptions and premises. It's a pretty big leap from pictures of temples to pictures of people. R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 14:35:06 -0700 (PDT) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Dutcher Movie Announcement Well, this certainly is a dramatic turnaround, isn't it? It looks like "God's Army 2" is expected to help pay for "The Prophet". This is to make up for the perceived commercial failure of "Brigham City" to fit that function. (As Dutcher becomes more well-known by the outside world this "failure" will be seen very differently indeed.) I get the feeling there have been things happening behind the scenes that no one involved is willing to publically discuss, yet. =20 Where all all the famous LDS millionaires and billionaires to help finance these movies? Why is the burden solely on Larry Miller to finance big-budget entertainment along the Wasatch Front? =20 One is shocked but not surprised that rumors have been spread that "President Hinckley personally asked Larry Miller" not to fund Dutcher's "The Prophet." I have no doubt these rumors are false. But as I said in an earlier post, popular LDS culture is made vastly uncomfortable by competition. It has to come from an official or quasi-official source to be accepted. This attitude will strangle LDS cinema in its cradle if it goes unchallenged. I suppose now we have a more or less laboratory experiment about to happen. "The Work and the Story" movie, made by veterans of official church movies, versus Dutcher's faithful but independent biography. It will be fascinating to compare the artistic and commercial failures and successes of both. R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:13:06 -0700 (PDT) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Women in LDS Film, Not Pretty Enough On this subject (and the general theme of men's predilection for pornography) there's a really interesting article by the neo-feminist author Naomi Wolf on why porn is bad for you. It does not make men more rapacious: it turns them off real women. Conservative cultures like orthodox Judaism, she argues, know why preserving modesty is essential for healthy sexuality: =20 http://nymetro.com/nymetro/news/trends/n_9437/index.html R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:00:09 -0600 From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] Language of Prayer > Of interest to me in learning something about the language of prayer > came from taking Spanish at BYU, (for which I worked my tail off, > to procure that 'B). In Spanish, as in other romance languages, you > have distictions of speaking in either the formal or the familiar.=20 > My > instructor went out his way to explain that the language of prayer=20 > was > in the familiar and we were to use the tu' form when praying in=20 > espanol > as an exercise in class. He noted that Diety wished to be spoken to > in the familiar to cement what we believe is quite literally a=20 > familial > bond. While I've grown rusty with my spanish, I am still touched by > that notion. > Kathy Tyner > Orange County, CA While I have heard the oppositte from some Spanish speakers, I will repeat what i have mentioned before: This is a cultural phenomenon and does not reveal any real truth about how God wants man to address him. For example: I speak Lao (and a smattering of Thai). In Lao, there are several levels of language to refer to other people, based on their relationship to you. I would refer to my parents with one leve of respect, the president of the USA (or Queen of England) with a higher level of respect and God gets higher respect than them all. My wife would be referred to in a more intimate vocabulary, and good friends would be addressed differnt than professional acquaintences. For example, the word "you." There is a gutter term I won't tramsliterate, but there's "chaw" for normal conversation. But anyone old enough to be my father would be referred to as "pah" and anyone old enough to be an older brother would be "Aie." Likewise God is referred to as "PhaOng." To do otherwise would be an insult in Lao culture. To refer to God (or Jesus) as "Chaw" or even simply "Pah" (there is a royal term for "father": "PhaBiDa"). It has nothing to do with, as your Spanish teacher said, whether God wants us to address him as a good friend. In Lao culture, that would be the ultimate insult. Laotions cannot take a God seriously that wouldn't be referred to in the highest possible terms. I've referred to pronouns here, but there are nouns and even verbs that you would use to refer to God. Often you just have to add teh honorific "Pha" on the front (In Thai I believe it is "Phra" witha rolled R), but sometimes there are different words (body, which is "HangkKai" would be preferably "PhaWologKai" instead of "PhaHangkKai"). (Note, my transliterations are not perfect - do not try to speak Lao based on them). Thee may have been the familiar at one point in the English language - that does not mean it currently is (unless we also want to start using "by and by" in the same way it was back in 1611 as well. Language changes over time and it is possible that the "thees" and "thous" are considered homorary now, since to most people they are associated with scripture). Anyway, what I am saying is that trying to use the argument your Spanish teacher was using (which I've heard Native speakers argue with before) would never work with Laotions. It is basically inconceivable and insulting to suggest such a thing. =20 FWIW. - --ivan wolfe - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:23:06 -0600 From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] Literature on the Mountain Meadows Massacre On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 23:10:20 +0000 "Elizabeth Petty Bentley" writes: > Wasn't there a short story or a one-act play called God's Fool? I > think I read it in a collection. Tom Rogers' play, Journey to Golgotha, was originally titled, God's Fools, but he didn't think BYU would let him keep the title when it was produced there in 1982. However, that play and three others -- Huebener, Reunion and Fire in the Bones (a play about John D. Lee) were published in a 1983 volume under the title, God's Fools: Plays of Mitigated Conscience. In 1992 Tom published another volume of plays: Huebener and other plays. This volume included Huebener and Fire in the Bones again, and Gentle Barbarian, Frere Lawrence and Charades. As of a few months ago this publication was still available in the BYU bookstore. scott [Bronson] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 07:11:08 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] TAYLOR, "Abinadai" (DN) Deseret Morning News Sunday, October 19, 2003 Opera 'Abinidi' is a dream come true BYU author says it exceeds expectations By Rebecca Howard It's good to dream big - really big. But when reality exceeds your expectations, well, that's great. Less than a year after earning his master's degree in Music=20 Composition, Meredith Ryan Taylor is watching one of his dreams come to life on stage at Brigham=20 Young University, and he says the result is far in excess of what he had hoped for. The BYU opera Department is putting on a fully staged production of=20 Taylor's new opera, "Abinadi," based on a story from the Book of Mormon. Taylor said=20 the production features a 50-plus-member cast accompanied by the BYU=20 Philharmonic Orchestra, with new sets and new costumes designed for the show. In=20 addition, the opera will be filmed by KBYU-TV for future broadcast. The rehearsals, Taylor said, have been going very well. "In the fall=20 production, they always have the best singers available in the school, so they have a lot of=20 good, really strong voices, and some good acting going on, too." (Taylor, who earned his=20 undergraduate degree in vocal performance, will be singing the part of King Noah; because=20 the production is double-cast, he won't be appearing onstage every night, however.) Although Taylor had a chance to test out the opera during a workshop=20 production earlier this spring, he admitted that he didn't really realize the=20 complications of putting on such a huge production. But in spite of its size, the composer is also quick to point out that=20 it's a fast-moving show. "It's about an hour and 40 minutes without intermission," he said.=20 "Although I've been a great fan of a lot of the music in opera, I find it hard myself to=20 sit through a three- hour performance, so I can imagine how other people must feel. So I tried to=20 make it very concise." Taylor said the opera, which is opening this weekend, began about five=20 years ago. " I had read a talk by (LDS Church) President (Ezra Taft) Benson that talked about=20 him having a dream of characters from the Book of Mormon being portrayed in music and film. I guess that sort of took hold, and I came up with the idea of doing an opera from the=20 Book of Mormon." Taylor said that he chose the story of Abinadi because it had good dramatic potential for the stage, including plenty of conflict and a story of redemption. It also=20 didn't hurt that, as an undergraduate at BYU, Taylor had written a research paper on the chiastic=20 structure of this text in the Book of Mormon. That was helpful in writing the libretto,=20 which he also created himself. Although he tried to follow the original scripture closely, Taylor said there were a few things that he had to add -- women, for instance. "It's a half-fact,=20 half-fiction, but I tried to stay true to the message of the story." The entire time that Taylor was writing the opera, he kept it apart=20 from what he was doing in school -- even with two degrees in music. He did, however, share=20 his ideas with his vocal instructor, Dr. Lawrence Vincent. "He has been very encouraging=20 throughout the whole process, from writing the piece to the libretto, to the setting of the=20 music." Taylor said it has long been his dream to produce works like this. And=20 he is hoping that this might inspire other composers to attempt the same kind of thing. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - -------- If you go . . . What: Abinadi : A Musical Drama by M. Ryan Taylor Where: de Jong Concert Hall, Brigham Young University When: Friday, Saturday and Wednesday, through Nov. 1, 7:30 p.m. How much: $12 Phone: 801-422-7644 Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company _________________________________________________________________ Want to check if your PC is virus-infected? Get a FREE computer virus scan=20 online from McAfee. =20 http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3D3963 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 17:52:11 -0600 From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: RE: [AML] Pleasantville--is it? > It's one of the times OSC is jaw-droppingly wrong about a movie,=20 > joining his baffling takes on American Beauty, About Schmidt, The=20 > Hours, The Piano, and -- most baffling of all -- The Philadelphia=20 > Story. Card is at his best as a reviewer when he champions art that=20 > other critics unjustly trash. It's sad when he's the one doing the=20 > unjust trashing. >=20 > Saying something is "vile" doesn't make it so... >=20 > Eric D. Dixon But in my mind, OSC is dead on on every one of those movies. I like his reviews because I finally realize I'm not the only person out there who hates these film and sees them as truly awful and morally repulsive. Then I read OSC's reviews and decided I was sane after all. - --ivan wolfe - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:49:54 -0400 From: "Richard Johnson" Subject: RE: [AML] Women in LDS Film Actually I made that point in response to one of your posts in which you accused some "local authority" of prevaricating when he spoke in church about his "beautiful wife" The flack I received came as hint or accusation that I had become a dirty old man, lusting after women regardless of age or appearance. (There is, of course, a significant difference between lusting after and admiring) I truly have almost never seen a woman that I didn't consider beautiful and, old as I am, I still find a trip to the mall almost as fine and experience as a trip to the Louvre. It was, in fact, this coversation that led me to save hundreds of posts (still do) with the ultimate goal of suggesting a column on perception and paradigm and how they relate to our on-line interaction. The column will never happen now (I don't see many, if any, on the list at all) because, I'm afraid that my mental capacity is not the same now as it was ten years ago. Having said that, standards of beauty vary significantly from society to society, from historical period to historical period, from calendar age to calendar age, and even from region to region, and the research that verifies that conclusion is widespread, and published in psychological journals, art journals, and even anthropologica studies, etc. Richard B. Johnson, Husband, Father, Grandfather, Actor, Director, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool. I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important- and most valuable. Http://www.PuppenRich.com - -----Original Message----- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Thom Duncan Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 4:38 PM To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [AML] Women in LDS Film And I bet I was one of the guys that gave you flack. =20 Not all women are beautiful. Some are uuuggggllly. =20 As are some men (that red-headed hunk Scott Bronson to=20 the contrary notwithstanding). But I'm learning the older I get that such things as=20 body size have little to do with what makes a woman=20 beautiful. For instance, I think Camryn Manheim,=20 the ... uh ... large woman on the practice is quite=20 attractive. I could see the two of us together quite=20 easily. Also, Queen Latifa is one HOT mama. =20 - -- Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 21:30:14 -0600 From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: RE: [AML] "Day of Defense" (Review) >In a message dated 10/14/03 5:28:59 PM, eric@ericdsnider.com writes: > ><< And then -- and this is really something special, some kind of=20 >hell-spawned miracle -- somehow, the film GETS WORSE! Yes! A major plot >event occurs that causes the bottom to drop out altogether,=20 >quality-wise. I won't spoil it for you, but suffice it to say that it's >really, really funny and isn't supposed to be. At that point, the film=20 >abandons all hope of salvaging itself. It is lost forever to the realm=20 >of bad filmmaking. We loved it, we tried to help it, but it had its=20 >free agency, and it chose darkness. >> > > >For those of use who will never see the movie, please, oh please, oh=20 >please reveal this plot event. I want to live vicariously through your=20 >viewing of this movie. SPOILERS AHEAD: Well, the defense attorney is spending all his time helping the=20 missionaries prepare their case, though how he's actually "helping"=20 them, I don't know, since he thinks Mormonism is as wrong as everyone=20 else in town. But anyway, he promised his little girl, Kelli, that he=20 would take her horseback riding this Saturday. Then Saturday arrives=20 and wouldn't you know it, he's busy with the missionaries, so he=20 blows off Kelli and gets in his car and drives away. Kelli,=20 distraught and tantrum-y, runs out the door after him, dressed in her=20 little cowgirl outfit, dashes into the street, is hit by a car (not=20 her father's), and dies. Yes, she dies. Naturally, this tragedy makes=20 her mom wonder "Where is my daughter now?," leading the missionaries=20 to teach her and her defense-attorney husband the first discussion.=20 And little Kelli is in heaven with all the other little girls who get=20 hit by cars in LDS films (see also: "Together Forever," "On the Way=20 Home"). Being hit by cars is the leading cause of death among LDS=20 females age 6-10. Eric D. Snider - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 07:19:46 EDT From: JanaRiess@aol.com Subject: [AML] _The DaVinci Code_ For myself, I thought that _The DaVinci Code_ was preposterous and also=20 poorly written. (That line early on about how the bishop knew the sun was=20 setting, but that his own star was rising, was exceptionally cringe-worthy, but the=20 prose just got worse from there.) A couple of weeks ago I interviewed Karen=20 King, a Harvard Div School prof whose new book, _The Gospel of Mary of=20 Magdala_, deals with many of the issues Brown raises in the novel, and I asked her=20 what she thought. So we had a lovely little rant session about it (though she=20 thought it was entertaining as fiction, and I couldn't even grant it that=20 much). She said that the novel is "best read as fiction" because it contains many=20 misunderstandings and historical inaccuracies. One of these is Brown's literal interpretation of the assertion in the Gospel of Philip that Jesus "used=20 to kiss Mary Magdalene often on the mouth." King says that the word for=20 "mouth" actually stands in for a lacuna in the text, and that the word could also=20 mean foot or hand. Furthermore, she says that in any case, the kiss is probably supposed to be a symbolic representation of the transmission of sacred=20 knowledge, and not a physical kiss. =20 Many of the Gnostic texts are extremely ascetic, and Brown's assertion that=20 the "real" early church was a highly sexualized, tantric movement just doesn't=20 bear out in the majority of the extant texts. Having said that, though, the=20 early "church" was extremely diverse, and it is much more appropriate to speak=20 of early "churches." =20 I read a lot of evangelical Christian fiction in my job, and most of it is,=20 quite frankly, thinly disguised religious and social propaganda. But this=20 book is exactly the same. It has pages and pages that preach unremittingly to=20 the reader, making them understand the "error" of their thinking about the=20 early church. It differs from the evangelical fiction only in its choice of=20 villains: in evangelical fiction, the church has been corrupted by nasty feminists=20 and freethinkers, whereas for Brown the feminist and freethinking gospel of=20 Jesus has been suppressed and destroyed by the church. We've talked on this list about how the vast majority of books don't=20 translate well to film. I actually think that this novel could make a _better_ movie=20 than it does a novel, both because the writing is so much like a screenplay=20 already and because the director will be forced to excise all of the lectures=20 and propgandizing that weigh down the plot. What surprises me most about the response to Brown's book is that=20 conservative Catholics aren't more upset by it. In the very same months that many=20 Mormons were attempting to do damage control because of the Krakauer book (also=20 from the same publisher, BTW), conservative Catholics and Opus Dei seemed to be=20 taking this in stride. And yes, it is fiction, though Brown hasn't done much=20 in his foreword or in interviews to emphasize that fact . . . and of course=20 that makes a difference, since Krakauer was purporting his version of LDS=20 history to be factual. But both books alleged that these mainstream religious=20 groups are, at their heart, inherently violent and ready to murder, steal, or lie=20 about the past in order to make others bend to their will (which, of course,=20 also happens to be God's will). OK, rant over. :-) FYI, if you're interested in this stuff, Karen King=20 says that ABC is going to do an hour-long special on _The DaVinci Code_ and what=20 historians and biblical scholars think about it. I think it's supposed to=20 air November 3. Jana Riess - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 17:43:16 -0600 From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Subject: [AML] Towards a Mormon Dogme: (was Women in LDS films, women watching women) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:46:32 -0600 From: "Eric Samuelsen" To: Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list Could I suggest at least one purely theoretical question in relation to this very interesting thread? Okay, we're just at the beginning of the LDS film movement. We're making a serious effort to explore our own culture cinematically, building on God's Army and Brigham City. Fine. What I wonder is, in what ways should and could this movement genuinely reflect our doctrine and culture? In what ways should we and could we be different? In the world, and not of the world? I think this is a question a lot of the filmmakers out there have been dealing with consciously, but they've come, in my opinion, to the wrong conclusions. I just got an email from one of the producers of Johnny Lingo, utterly baffled that the film hasn't done better in the box office. He's a good guy, a businessman who was once my brother's bishop, and he wrote me and said 'people want a clean, family oriented film, without violence, sexuality or profanity.' And he's dead wrong. People in LDS culture do NOT want to see a family oriented film. They want to see a good film, with a compelling and powerful story. If it's also family oriented, that's frosting on the cake, but if it's not particularly G rated, they'll see it anyway, and grumble a little at the naughty bits. Holes, or The Rookie, or Finding Nemo (examples my friend cited) were not successful because they were family oriented. They succeeded because they were terrific films, well acted and beautifully filmed, with exciting, compelling stories. The fact that they were family oriented just means that you can be more comfortable taking the kids.=20 I think the same mistake was made by the producers of The Book of Mormon movie, frankly. LDS audiences are NOT clamoring for a film version of the Book of Mormon. We could well be enticed into seeing a GOOD film version of that story.=20 But in what other ways can films reflect our values, our belief system? What I think we need is something akin to the Dogme 95 manifesto. Here is the 'Vow of Chastity' taken by the Dogme 95 filmmakers. I've included my own comments and suggestions for applications for LDS filmmakers. =20 > "I swear to submit to the following set of rules drawn up and confirmed=20 >by DOGME 95: The reasons for Dogme were what they called a 'technological revolution' which in their opinion was killing film. This manifesto was written up by Lars von Trier (Dancer In the Dark, Breaking the Waves) and Thomas Vinterberg (The Third Lie, It's All About Love). Other filmmakers have signed on to it. >1. Shooting must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in=20 >(if a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen=20 >where this prop is to be found). Certainly God's Army and Brigham City followed this rule, as did In the Company of Men. It suggests a certain kind of realism. What I'd love to see would be a Mormon Mike Leigh, a Mormon Secrets and Lies. >2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa.=20 >(Music must not be used unless it occurs where the scene is being shot). Although I don't think this rule needs to be rigorously followed by our filmmakers, I would love to see us getting away from perhaps our worst cliche, the swelling music underneath backlit long shots. >3. The camera must be hand-held. Any movement or immobility attainable in=20 >the hand is permitted. (The film must not take place where the camera is=20 >standing; shooting must take place where the film takes place). >4. The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable. (If >there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single=20 >lamp be attached to the camera). >5. Optical work and filters are forbidden. >6. The film must not contain superficial action. (Murders, weapons, etc.=20 >must not occur.) By losing a focus on murder and crime, the Dogme guys have freed themselves to explore fundamental religious questions. Miracles, actual religious miracles, are NOT forbidden. >7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden. (That is to say that=20 >the film takes place here and now.) >8. Genre movies are not acceptable. >9. The film format must be Academy 35 mm. >10. The director must not be credited. I would add three new rules, and perhaps cut or amend rules 2, 3 and 9. My rules: 1) I will cast people who look like real people. No more Hollywoodized supermodels playing physicists, no more putting beautiful women in fake noses to play homely writers. I will search for the beautiful and the transcendent in everyday lives, and especially, in everyday faces. 2) I will refrain from preaching. Film, and indeed art generally, involves a search for personal truth, not an expounding of revealed truth.=20 3) At no time in the publicity process will the cost of the film be mentioned. We're creating art. How much art costs is irrelevant.=20 Here's the final part of the Dogme manifesto: >Furthermore I swear as a director to refrain from personal taste! I am no=20 >longer an artist. I swear to refrain from creating a "work", as I regard=20 >the instant as more important than the whole. My supreme goal is to force=20 >the truth out of my characters and settings. I swear to do so by all the=20 >means available and at the cost of any good taste and any aesthetic=20 >considerations. >Thus I make my VOW OF CHASTITY." What I think is, we've created this movement without any kind of philosophical or theoretical underpinning, and so we're creeping rapidly towards a mini-Hollywood model. And that seems to me most unfortunate. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:53:33 -0600 From: "Eric Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Language of Prayer FWIW, my esteemed brother decided long ago that he was never going to figure out 'thee' 'thy' 'thou' 'thine.' So he decided to just pick one of those words and use it for all of them. He picked 'thy.' His prayers are beautiful, but also kinda funny. "We ask that thy will bless those who can't be here today, and that thy will be with thy children, that thy will look over them. . . " Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 10:55:49 -0500 From: Ronn! Blankenship Subject: [AML] Fwd: Very Sad News I just received the following and am passing it along for those here who may have known Marc: - ----- begin forwarded message ----- To: Scripture -L Subject: [SL] FW: Marc Schindler Prominent list member Marc Schindler has passed away. His brother, Craig, is also on this list. If you see this Craig, I was so sorry to hear about this. I was worried that this might happen given Marc's recent substantial medical problems, but I was hoping that his health would improve. My deepest condolences. > -----Original Message----- > From: Gordon Garside [mailto:gvgarside@shaw.ca] > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 6:25 AM > To: president@fairlds.org > Cc: webmaster@fairlds.org > Subject: Marc Schindler > > > Brother Gordon: > > I am the Bishop of Brother Marc Schindler, and his > friend. Brother > Schindler passed away last evening. He was a great > proponent of FAIR and > gospel scholarship. > > The funeral will likely be this Thursday or Friday. > > If any would like to send a tribute they could send > an email to me. If > any would like to express their condolences to > Marc's wife, Kathy, and their > family, the address of the Schindler's is: 41 > Matthew Road, Spruce Grove, > Alberta, T7X 2R6. > > > - ------ end forwarded message ------ - -- Ronn! :) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:33:56 -0600 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Women in LDS films, women watching women If you get a chance, you all ought to see Tayva in ALL MY SONS at the Provo Theatre. She is absolutely astounding. The entire cast is fabulous. I really did, honestly, leave that play breathless. It was the best thing (the most professional thing) I have EVER seen in this valley. Bar none. (And the writing was pretty savvy too!) Cheers!=20 Marilyn [Brown] from the Villa Playhouse Theatre. (And I'd say the same about our productions if it happened, but we are still trying, and trying hard, and our CHRISTMAS CAROL promises to be VERY fun.) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:59:46 -0600 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] RE: Women in LDS Film, or Not Pretty Enough Jongiorgi waxes lyrical! "The silence of the midnight hour, the hums > and crackles of the house. A sleeping family. Breath, life, and now: > the quiet life of the mind." Have I been asleep while Jongiorgi has begun to blossom as essayist, poet, or perhaps even a novelist? Nice to watch it happening! Kudos! Marilyn Brown - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:16:51 -0400 From: "Jamie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Language of Prayer Tom Johnson: >Reverting to formality in public prayers and informality in private=20 >prayers seems a form of hypocrisy. You believe one thing yet act=20 >another way. I don't see why. It's pretty common for someone who is speaking for a group=20 will do so in a more formal manner ("We the people of the United States in=20 order to form a more perfect union...") than someone engaged in a personal=20 conversation ("Hey, I've got some spiffy new ideas about running this=20 country. I'm so brilliant!"). It seems like a reasonalble way of going about it. ~Jamie Laulusa - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 13:33:46 -0800 From: Stephen Carter Subject: RE: [AML] violent movies This conversation is reminding me of an interesting discussion I was a part of=20 in a fiction class I took. We were reading Nicholson Baker's _The Fermata_.=20 Essentially it's piece of literary porn. Plenty of short interesting stuff=20 between the long masturbation scenes and sexual fantasies, but eventually not=20 worth my time. I came into class annoyed, trying to figure out what sort of=20 literary virtue my teacher had seen in this book. The only virtue I could=20 really find was that the author had made a highly readable piece of junk.=20 Because it is really well written. The class actually turned out to be one of the best I've attended. We were=20 able to get a lot out of the book, and I wondered why. I started realizing=20 that it wasn't the book we were getting anything out of, it was our own=20 conversation. The conversation had the book as its jumping off point, but=20 beyond that we were kind of drawing from our own selves. So then I read this article a few weeks ago in the Deseret News from some film=20 critic talking about how he has a friend who went to some awful religious play=20 with the article's author. The author thought the play was awful. But his=20 friend thought it was wonderful. From a critical point, the play was badly=20 acted, scripted, and everything. But the guy who liked it, really liked it. It=20 spoke to him. Then there's Eric Samuelson and Sam Brown arguing about the=20 virtues of Gladiator. This is what I think. The experience of a person with a piece of media or work=20 of art is partially based on the person him or herself. Essentially reader=20 response theory. So the person with a self that is able to respond to that=20 work of art is possibly not responding so much to the work itself as the ideas=20 and emotions coming out of the person as a result of the art. A personal example. I have watched the movie Seven twice, and both times it=20 has been a spiritual experience. "What?," you say, "a spiritual experience=20 revolving around a serial killer that murders people according to the seven=20 deadly sins? A movie that was penned by one of the main writers of Tales from=20 the Crypt?" Yes indeed. The end of that movie expanded my feeling for the=20 hugeness of life. I was absolutely flattened by a violent, cuss-filled,=20 blood-spattered whodunit. For some people, the end was probably just a great=20 twist. But it was a lot more for me. So I think that when we're talking about how a piece of art affects us, we are=20 partially talking about ourselves. Making art into a kind of conversation - a=20 metaphor I like a lot. So perhaps one piece of important information we could take from this=20 conversation is, if Eric Samuelson ever invites you to the Colloseum, don't=20 go. And you find me reading St. Augustine, leave the area quickly and quietly. Stephen Carter Fairbanks, Alaska - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #200 ******************************