From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #52 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, May 29 2000 Volume 01 : Number 052 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 12:30:40 PDT From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Writing Master's Programs >Darvell wrote: > > > For over a year now, I have felt compelled to return to college to get a > > masters degree in creative writing to further my career as well as my > > talents in the LDS writing world. I've been working for 8 years in my > > field as a computer programmer with my BS degree in computer science, >but > > now I want to expand my education by getting a master degree in writing. > > > > Does anybody know how I can go about doing this? Michael wrote: >The question I'd be asking is, WHY are you doing this? In my opinion, >one of the most useless things you could do to become a writer is to get >a degree in English or writing or whatever. What do those professors >know about writing in the real world? I think asking why one wants a writing degree is a good thing, but not because English professors don't know anything about writing. You're a bit too hostile here--it sounds like you have a bone to pick, rather than a convincing argument to make. The fact is, while many prominent 'literary' authors had/have degrees/professions unrelated to writing or literature, per se, there were/are also many whose degrees/professions were closely linked to the English department. John Irving, Raymond Carver, John Cheever, Kurt Vonnegut, Wallace Stegner--the list goes on and on--all writers who had degrees in or taught English and/or writing courses at colleges and universities around the country. Flannery O'Connor (who held a MFA in creative writing from U of Iowa) said all you need is a childhood and you have plenty of writing material, suggesting that one's education has little to do with what one might write about. >You'd be better off getting a degree in almost anything else, so that >you actually have something to write about. Otherwise you could end up >adding to the endless piles of "literary" works about starving authors >or college professors with mid-life crises, because that's what you >would know about. > >If you got a degree in anthropology, you could write stories about >primitive people. If you got a degree in physics, you could write clever >and convincing technological science fiction. If you got a degree in >mythology, you could write fantasies basd on ancient myths. If you got a >degree in history you could write historical novels and bring the past >to life for people. Psychology, and you could write horror or >psychological thrillers. You place WAY too much emphasis on the idea that one writes only about what one 'knows.' Saul Bellow has a degree in anthropology, but he doesn't write about primitive peoples (and he teaches in English departments, by the way--oh, and won a Nobel prize...). William Carlos Williams was a doctor, but he didn't write his poetry about medically related topics; nor did Wallace Stevens write poetry about insurance, though he was an insurance salesman. And last time I checked, none of T.S. Eliot's poetry had anything to do with banking. >The possibilities are endless, as long as you study something that isn't >about writing. My attitude seems to be a common one among many >accomplished authors, not least with Orson Scott Card. He says, get hold >of the English department's reading list and read all that great >literature, but for heaven's sake, don't listen to one word about what >the English department says about how to write. Again, this comes off as an irrational polemic against English professors. Do you have any idea what kind of writing community exists out there in the academic world? It is true, there is some question about the worth of a degree in writing--but this concern is primarily pragmatic. The degree won't get you a job, won't make you any money, won't guarantee publication or success. But, while the harshest critics of writing programs have some valid complaints, it remains a fairly widely-held notion that working and talking with others about your writing, and studying with those who have published, can be extremely beneficial. (Remember, professors in academia have to 'publish or perish'--if they're teaching in a writing program, chances are they've published at least a book or two, if not much more than that--and their writing isn't about academic life, despite your insinuations that this is all a person in academia knows, and therefore all they are capable of writing about. Go back and check the past 10 winners of Pulitzer prizes, National Book Awards, etc., and you'll find a surprising number of the authors either hold a degree in English or writing, or teach/have taught in English/writing departments. One more example: Toni Morrison, our most recent American Nobel laureate, occasionally teaches writing workshops, and has a BA in English.) >If you want to get a master's degree, that's wonderful. But never think >that there is any correlation between a degree and a writing career. >Especially between a literary degree and a writing career. Your career >would be furthered to a much greater degree if you spent that time and >energy writing than jumping through academic hoops to get a degree. True, there is no correlation between having a degree in writing and being a successful writer. But the same can be said for business (how many millionaires are out there without degrees in business?). That doesn't mean a business degree is worthless if you want to succeed in business. It just means it helps some, while it proved unnecessary for others. Do you want to say that business professors know nothing about business because there are plenty of successful businesspersons out there without business degrees? I agree, one learns most about writing by simply writing--and academic hoops are a pain in the rear. But one of the greatest benefits a writing degree has to offer is _time_. Taking two years or so to concentrate on a writing degree is the perfect excuse to devote two years or so to _writing_. That's hard to do when you're busy reading anthropology or physics textbooks, or working 40 hours/week at something _other_ than writing... Jason Steed ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 13:57:57 -0700 From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Writing Master's Programs [MOD: This is just to let everyone know that we have a very full in-box for the List at the moment. I'm planning to send out only about 10 posts today, it being a Saturday, and since Monday is a holiday I plan to treat it as a "Saturday" too, with only 10-12 posts. (My understanding is that this is desirable particularly for those who receive these messages at work.) This won't even get us through what's currently in the in-box--not counting various messages that have already gone into overflow. So if you send a message today, the earliest it might go out is next Tuesday. So please be patient, and consider carefully which comments you most want to get into the discussion--not just on this but on all current threads.] I got an M.A. in English with an "emphasis" in creative writing from BYU. = While I don't regret the effort and while it indirectly opened up a lot of = professional opportunities for me, the actual creative writing component = was quite weak. I could have done--and have done--better on my own with = independent critique groups and with books and magazines published by = Writer's Digest. (I also have to admit that I'm more of a middle-brow = person than a high-brow academic.) It is telling that BYU doesn't even offer an M.F.A. and didn't, at the = time I was there, offer specialized creative writing classes by genre = (poetry, novel, story, etc.). You just took two general creative writing = classes--sometimes dominated by undergraduates--and did a thesis--the rest = was the regular English M.A. theory, literature, and rhetoric classes, = suited more toward those who were Ph.D. and professorship bound. My thesis = committee and defense experience was about 95% censorship of stuff in my = novella that was too questionable about Church programs or too sexually = explicit. Maybe I didn't have the right professors at the right time (or = the right personality for them to engage with), but I got very little = practical training in creative writing and didn't feel I was in the hands = of a dynamic, visionary, well-organized and run creative writing program = in the least--at least from 1992-1998 while I was affiliated there.. However, my "creative writing" degree indirectly opened up the following = professional opportunities: * Through the graduate English program I got a decent-paying summer = internship in curriculum editing at the LDS Church corporate offices, = which led to a 6-and-a-half year editing job at the Ensign magazine (which = I was quite tired of after 5 years but which offered much professional = development, including overseas reporting trips). * I got turned on to Mormon literature through Eugene England's undergradua= te class. That directly led to my abiding involvement in the Mormon = literary scene, including the Association for Mormon Letters and the = now-defunct literary journal Wasatch Review International (Mr. England = promoted both in his class). I am currently much more personally interested= in and stimulated by my involvement in the AML's Irreantum magazine and = AML-List and occasionally working on my own Mormon-themed novel than I am = by my full-time marketing writing job in the nutritional supplement = industry. * During the BYU degree, I had the opportunity to teach freshman English, = which paid well and gave great experience. I didn't initially enjoy = teaching enough to pursue it as my full-time profession, but I liked it = well enough that I still regularly teach night classes in writing. In = fact, I might turn to teaching full-time in the future, because as the = years go by I like it more and more. However, I'm not the slightest bit = interested in getting a Ph.D., because you have to learn two foreign = languages and do a bunch of other theoretical, academic stuff that makes = my eyes glaze over. I think BYU's English dept. was/is caught between having to please BYU = administration and yet not wanting to embrace any kind of Mormon-correlated= approach to literature--so they largely lay low and do damage control, = such as with my thesis or with unwise-under-the-circumstances faculty = hiring decisions, or they leave. Maybe BYU was better with creative = writing before the crackdowns--I was there during the Brian Evenson and = Gail Houston stuff, after all. I hope UVSC can get a good Mormon creative = writing program going along with their Mormon cultural studies program, = maybe even an M.F.A. someday. I would love to be a founding faculty member = in that kind of program. Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:03:56 -0500 From: Todd Robert Petersen Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Writing Master's Programs To D. Michael Martindale: Here is a short list of writers of no mean status who have degrees in English and/or creative writing who do not seem to have written the kinds of books that you suggests are the only output of the universities: C.S. Lewis J.R.R. Tolkein Wallace Stegner Flannery O'Connor Charles Baxter Louise Erdrich Toni Morrison (Nobel prize winner) Ai (the best selling poet in American right now) Richard Hugo And from the Mormon set: Brian Evenson Lance Larsen Doug Thayer Bruce Jorgenson Margaret Young Darrell Spencer Sue Howe Do you really wish to say that these writers know nothing about writing in the real world? It is not the school that messes up writers. It is the fact that they never had anything to say in the first place. Garbage in; garbage out. I've never seen evidence that school has taken a good writer and curdled their work. It has kept mediocre writers from progressing, but I don't think it works the other way around. The other primary problem with contemporary writers is that they do not know the tradition, in many ways, *because* of their autodidacticism. In general, writers have not read Chekhov, Flaubert, Forester, Crane, Eliot (George), Zola, Nabokov, Dostoyevski, Ford, and the other writers who constitute the foundation of what's happening today. Just writing is not enough, not for a lot of people. One needs to make contact with writers in order to learn some of the theories of writing. One might just as easily tell a young violinist not to go to a conservatory. Just practice on your own, "Your career would be furthered to a much greater degree if you spent that time and energy writing than jumping through academic hoops to get a degree." You could say that, but it would be nonsense, just like telling Copland not to have gone to Paris to study at the American Conservatory at Fontainbleu. Perhaps Ravel should not have been the musical director there either. There is a middle path here, and that is to use school to learn at an accelerated pace, to spend time with people who share your passion, to have a group of folks whose job it is to pay attention to your work, to read books you would not choose on your own, to learn a little from the masters, to learn to really pick apart a work of literature, to participate in a real community, to share, and perhaps even to offer yourself to the others in the program in order to bring the whole project of university education to a little higher level. School is as much about giving as it is about getting. To become a good writer one must understand (at least) two things: what it means to be human and what it means to write. School helps with the second. The gospel helps with the first. Todd Robert Petersen - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:07:07 -0500 From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Editing Ethics I think a lot depends on the expectations of the situation. Editing for "house style" (which includes punctuation, capitalization, and other such items as whether you include that optional comma before the "and" in a series) is commonplace and is not something that is routinely passed by the author. That's simply the expectation in nonfiction writing for journalism. If you're a paid staff writer for a newspaper or magazine, editing of submissions is commonplace. Additions are more rare than deletions (usually for reasons of space), but certainly not unheard of, especially when the editor has additional knowledge/material that can "fill out" the article or provide added background. Cuts for length are generally made at the last minute, and cannot possibly be passed by the author for approval. I think the expectation becomes a bit different when you're a contract writer with a byline--particularly if there's a blurb at the end of the article describing your background (with the implication that the article represents your expertise). There, I think the professional thing to do is to submit the edited copy for the author's review. That doesn't necessarily mean pointing out all the cuts and changes, however. It's perfectly acceptable to provide galley proofs of the article *as edited* for you to make your comments there. (The theory on this is that if, on reading it, you can't tell the difference, the change is probably fine. If you want to go through and compare your work line-by-line with the original, that's your call.) The situation can be different yet again with fiction and, especially, poetry. In these cases, word choice and punctuation can be important matters of style, rather than usage--though this also varies from author to author. Cases in point: J.R.R. Tolkien, who was infuriated with the copy editors who changed his "dwarves" to "dwarfs," and Madeleine L'Engle, who had deliberately left the period off at the end of "Mrs" for her Mrs Whatsit, Mrs Who, and Mrs Which, to subtly suggest something of their unearthly quality. But that's a very subtle thing, and I'd hate to have to assume (as an editor) that a writer had made such a choice deliberately. Many authors are more interested in telling a story than in controlling their work on a word-by-word or punctuation-mark-by-puncuation-mark level. And all of us, no matter how careful, make mistakes. It's an editor's job to catch those mistakes--not to assume that mistakes are never made. >From my experience, professional editors will often adapt their approach to the individual writer they're working with. Some writers are very careful on a word and sentence level. Others are not. If you see that your writer isn't very careful about things like that, you're not as likely to query the writer before making what you consider small changes for awkwardness or clarity. If, on the other hand, your writer's work seems highly polished, you may go out of your way to ask questions before making any changes. In general--as a fiction author--if you've made some subtle stylistic choices that you think the copyeditor may be tempted to tamper with, it's probably a good idea to submit a style sheet with your manuscript (not during the initial submission, but after it's been accepted for publication)--a memo to the editor explaining your choices. It will make his/her job easier, to know what things you are doing that were deliberate and what weren't, and what your rationale is. It also improves the chances that the editor will consult with you on other items not on the list. (I'm guessing on this, by the way, not speaking from personal experience--but it seems like a rational guess to me.) But that, as I say, is with fiction/creative work. Magazines and newspapers have their own style, and the expectation is that they will edit nonfiction articles to conform to that style. You just have to know what the expectations are going in. (I have to confess here that as someone who wears an editorial hat fairly often, I am a nit-picker when it comes to looking over the changes that other editors make to my writing--even my nonfiction work-for-hire. But I also find that even if an editor's changes don't work, they often signal problems that I hadn't recognized in my own original writing--places where I need to do revision. And in general, I try to respect their judgment. As an author, I can say with absolute authority what I *meant* to achieve. But I can't say with any authority at all whether it works or not for the reader. In that respect, the reader is always right. You may decide that a given reader's opinion doesn't represent your audience very well and can safely be ignored--and you may disagree with your reader, or editor, about what to do to fix a problem, or even about what the problem actually is--but on its own terms, an editor's feedback is always important, as representing at the very least one reader's view of what you actually did (and didn't) achieve. (I also have to say that I've never learned to be happy when my work comes back with editing changes. What I really, really want is for the editor to say that what I wrote is brilliant, with no need for revisions at all. But I've also learned from experience that the editing process does generally make my work better in the end. So I try to be--well, if not graceful, at least not downright rude--and grit my teeth and pretend to smile when my work comes back with red marks all over it. At least until I'm in private, where I can rant and rave about my editor's stupidity, and my experienced wife will nod and sympathize, and eventually I'll get down to making the changes the editor requested and usually discover that it's not so bad after all.) Jonathan Langford speaking for myself, not the List jlangfor@pressenter.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:17:31 -0600 From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Editing Ethics - ----- Original Message ----- From: lynn gardner To: Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 8:36 PM Subject: RE: [AML] Editing Ethics > But thank heaven for editors who care about that single word being plural or > singular or where the comma really belongs!! And thank heaven for editors > who make us better than we might have been. Lynn Gardner Alright, amen Lynn. My grammer needs a lot of work and my eight year old can spell as well as I can. I need a good editer to fix those errors because I don't trust my machine. The grammer check keeps telling me to change things that I know are correct and the spell check keeps telling me I am misspelling words that I know I have right. My name gives the spell check fits everytime, as do the character names in my fantasy. So I do want the help but I do not want any thing changed without my consent or knowledge. I mean some well meaning editer might spell my name Connie Ennis. Konnie Enos - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:34:13 -0600 From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tan? Can I offer the perspective of a convert. Our religion is a culture, not because of where we live, but how we order our lives. Our very language is foreign to outsiders. Ask any non-member what a stake or ward is or Primary, or even Relief Society and many might not be able to guess what Sacrament Meeting is. Elders to them mean someone with white hair and wrinkles. Our culture has nothing to do with were we live but how we speak and act. But it is still a culture with many different, regional, variations. I am sure that Japan's L.D.S. culture is somewhat different then ours, but it is just a different version of our culture as a whole. Does that make any sence. Konnie Enos - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:40:44 -0700 From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit [MOD: Okay, I know I'm talking a lot in the current threads, but I'm trying to be proactive here... I'm hesitant about posting this message from Chris because I think it has the potential to stimulate a discussion of specific sexual practices that is doubly not-on-topic for the List, both because it's not really about literature and because it could make many List members uncomfortable. And yet at the same time I think Chris's identification-with-the-persecutors comment makes an important contribution to the discussion, and the whole question of what degree of openness is appropriate in dealing with sexuality is a key issue in Mormon literature. So I'm sending on the post, with the caution that some List members may find that parts of this post go beyond what they feel comfortable discussing in a public forum, and that any responses to this post need to adhere to a discussion of the *literary* dimension of this issue in Mormon culture.] An article in the current _Dialogue_ offers a fascinating theory that = applies to this thread. In "Mormon Psychohistory," Koltko-Rivera talks = about how "a century after the heyday of Mormon persecution, Mormons = appear to be disproportionately represented in precisely the offices under = which they were persecuted, or through which Mormons would be persecuted = today if the federal government were again to harass us." [armed forces, = national law enforcement agencies, intelligence services] As part of this portion of his article, he talks about how historian D. = Michael Quinn uses the concept of identification with the aggressor to = examine the paradox of Mormon attitudes toward sexuality. Koltko-Rivera = asks, "Given what appear to be statements that some form of sexuality is = an important, valuable, and eternal element of human and divine existence, = several aspects of contemporary Mormon life [including literature] appear = puzzling. Why are so many Mormons singularly uninformed about sexual = matters? Why are Mormon families often unwilling to discuss sexual = matters, except to concentrate on what NOT to do?" His answer is: "The anti-Mormon agressors of the 19th century held to a = very repressive form of Victorian morality, at least in public. By = identifying with their aggressors, Mormons adopted the Victorian reticence = to discuss sexuality. Indeed, Mormonism has maintained Victorianism long = after the Victorian approach virtually died out in the surrounding = society." I did have one refreshing bishop growing up who had a copy of the = illustrated _Joy of Sex_ shelved in the open in his home living room and = who said in personal interviews that masturbation was not that huge a = deal. My parents also had the _Joy of Sex_ in the home, but hidden. = Somehow I discovered it under a suitcase (maybe it was even my dad's = temple suitcase--yeah, I think it was), and I ripped the dust cover one = time sliding it back under. My own copy of the more recent, full-color = version of the book is openly shelved in my basement living room. (I won't = tell you who the bishop was because he's famous in Utah.) Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 16:24:56 -0600 From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit A very brief "Amen" to Matthew's words. My students write personal essays in one of our writing units, and it's not surprising that a good many of them write about their parents' divorce. Many have not allowed themselves to really write out their feelings of betrayal until they do this essay. The pain which comes through is heart-wrenching. I recall one essay where the student was remembering her father's telling her he was leaving, and asking her, "Don't you want Daddy to be happy?" To a child, if Daddy's "happiness" means his absence and the tearing up of the most vital structure in that child's life, it's a pretty lame word. I've gone through a divorce, and certainly don't regret it. But even though I HAD to get out of that marriage for my spiritual and physical survival, the divorce had a profound effect on my daughter--and she is still affected now, some 17 years after the fact. And that still hurts me. Simply put, happiness cannot come on someone else's back. We are deceiving ourselves if we believe we can pursue passion at the cost of family without invoking eternal consequences--not only to ourselves, but to our children. So certainly moral literature must take a full look at the cost of pleasure. And sometimes, it must take a look at the cost of marriage. It ain't easy. Matthew Hamby wrote: > I think that it is important not to confuse a presumably and apparently happy ending > with there being no downside. The two individuals involved in Thom's account are both > happier now, and enjoy their lives and each other more fully now than they ever > previously did, and for that I rejoice for and with them. > > In my experience, however, that just frankly does not equate with there being no down > side to the whole story. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:26:26 +0000 From: John Bennion Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit My forthcoming novel _Falling Toward Heaven_ (now wasn't that subtle) describes a missionary who falls from chastidy with one of his contacts. They then make a marriage out of it. I have tried to write about the tangles (sexual, emotional, and intellectual) of a long-term relationship. Most of the books and movies we have deal with courtship or very fleeting relationships. How could I write a novel about marriage and leave out the effects of intimate relations? ________________ Professor John Bennion 3117 JKHB English Department Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602-6280 Tel: (801) 378-3419 Fax: (801) 378-4705 - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 19:37:29 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit Konnie Enos wrote: > In writing the story of your friend won't you have to protray the heartache > that he and his new wife must have gone through to get back into church > activity. Isn't that the consequences of adultry, whether or not the > eventual outcome is good? Yes, but is it heartache that, in essence, is any more gut-wrenching that what occurs in a normal, married family? Say, a wayward son, or a teenage daughter pregnant out of wedlock. These are part of normal families where no adultery has been committed by mother and father? IOW, I don't know if the emotional agony of working one's back into the church is any more severe than what happens to people who haven't broken their marital vows. Thom [Duncan] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 01:15:04 -1000 From: Randall Larsen Subject: [AML] Peter SAMUELSON, Joseph & Emma Movie Listmembers, Has anyone heard any news about the Joseph and Emma motion picture in development from a script by Chris Matheson (Revenge of the Nerds). See Salt Lake Tribune MORMONS AND THE MOVIES: HOLLYW ... 10/31/1998 However, producer Peter Samuelson promises the latest Mormon-themed drama, ``Joseph and Emma,'' will strive for balance in telling the story of church founder Joseph Smith and his first wife, Emma Hale. (After Smith founded the church, he married several other women secretly in the beginning of the church's practice of polygamy; the practice was abandoned by the church in 1890.) Samuelson said he, co-producer John Morrissey and writer Chris Matheson ``share a belief . . . that this is an absolutely wonderful story about faith and persistence, and also a wonderful love story.'' I announced a similar project at the Cannes Film Festival in 1984. It was entitled Nauvoo: Joseph and Emma. I was promised the rights to Sam Taylor's book Nightfall at Nauvoo which fills in the gaps in the written record with the Oral traditions of the Taylor's and the Young's. I had Rachel Ward in mind to play Emma. I am told the star came on a go see to my Bungalow office at the old David O. Selznick studios. I was at the beach that day. My office partner Gail Hurd was in Europe and our secretary was at the L.A. library doing a 3D patent search. Well perhaps had I got a committment from Ms. Ward the project could have flew. The treatment for this film was advertised in a Festival publication. Unfortunately the anticipated funding fell through. I wish producer Samuelson Luck. The "Love Story" between Joseph and Emma is the obvious vehicle to tell the story of Nauvoo. Before me Hollywood Producer Michael Grilikes had considered producing the Sam Taylor book in the early 1970s. Grilikes idea was to focus on the trial of the Murderers of Joseph and tell the story with flashbacks as I recall. At the time I was working with Orson Welles. I asked Orson if he was interested in the project. Too religious he mumbled. I sent a letter to Redford's Warner Bros. office asking Redford if he was interested in playing Joseph. I got a polite letter back wishing me luck. It seems Redford always plays winners. The martydom scene would have been out of character. I think the Love story between Joseph and Emma is a much better idea. Otherwise there are too many characters. How much do you tell however, the Plural marriage and Polyandry is difficult for lifetime members of the church to understand. We have not experienced living the principle. How much can you tell to a non-member audience? There are some nice plot lines with the Joseph/ Sidney Rigdon class over Nancy Rigdon & Sidney's possible disloyalty to Joseph. John Cook Bennet could be played by George Hamilton. My old friend Fred Ward resembles Wm Marks the Nauvoo stake president. Marty Landau could play Rigdon. Just before he died, in a phone conversation Sam Taylor told me to hurry up that he had heard someone else was working on bringing Joseph Story to the Big Screen. I also wanted to remake Sam Taylor's script Sabrina. Unfortunately someone beat me to that. Hopefully I will have a shot at doing Joseph's story someday. Perhaps the Samuelson Joseph and Emma project stalled. Does anyone know? If the project has, I will ask my agent to pitch my treatment one more time. I anxiously await any news about the Samuelson project. Randall Larsen - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:47:28 -0700 From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Writing Master's Programs I had no prior language experience or study of note. BYU's English dept. = admitted me to the master's program under the condition I take an = intensive reading course to satisfy the language requirement. I took the = course, it wasn't too hard, I passed the reading test, and then I promptly = forgot it all. Big waste of time, but doable as a hoop to jump through. * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #52 *****************************