From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #93 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 Thursday, July 6 2000 Volume 01 : Number 093 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 15:08:29 -0500 From: "Darvell" Subject: Re: [AML] Pioneer Stories Andrew Hall wrote: > Today, however, while The Work and the Glory and The Storm > Testament have been big sellers, our better authors seem have > avoided writing prose fiction set in the past. I wonder if this has to do > with a more general literary trend of looking down on historical fiction, > regulating it to lesser, pot-boiler type authors. I'm a bit confused by this as well. I have written a historical novel set in Utah prior to the arrival of the pioneers. It is very historical and "very LDS." It would best be described as "what could have happened" in this little-known time period. But even with the break-thru novels of LDS historical fiction, I think publishers are hesitant to risk their money on such novels. I think my novel has a great, well-researched story, that could be compelling and interesting to LDS audiences, but I have failed to woo a publisher for it, even tho I have received some pretty good comments on it. I think this is an example where a great story cannot (or will not) sell because of a real or perceived lack of audience. And I really don't know if the lack of audience is real or just perceived. In the meantime, if I'm interested in publication, I'm forced to work on more contemporary stories. Darvell _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 13:32:04 -0700 From: "lynn gardner" Subject: RE: [AML] Two Utah County Dinners I'll be in town for Booksellers and would LOVE to meet anyone anywhere for dinner and get acquainted time! Lynn Gardner - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 15:15:17 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Writing About Religion [MOD: Thanks to several List members for posting explanations of this terminology. As for this interpretation of Thom's, while it doesn't seem to correspond to how the terms are actually used (based on what others have posted), what a great metaphor...] Deborah Wager wrote: > Now I've read all the Father Tim books and I still don't know what it means to sit > on the gospel side, though I went so far as to call my brother-in-law who went to > an Anglican high school to ask him (but it turns out he only went there for school, > and worshiped as a Roman Catholic, so he didn't know). I will hazard a guess. Liberal Episopalians sit on the Gospel side, conservative Episcopalians sit on the Epistles side. I say this based on what most religious liberals end up being able to accept in Christianity, the generalities of Christ, while rejecting the specifics of the Epistles: "Women keep silent in the church." In our church, we would call one side the Liahona side and the other side the Iron Rod side. - -- Thom Duncan - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 13:53:41 -0600 From: "Rachel Ann Nunes" Subject: [AML] What Can AML-List Do for Me? I know this subject heading is presumptuous, but I think the many writers on this list might find my comments helpful to them as well. So here goes: I am very serious about my writing, and one of the reasons I have been a participant on the AML-List is because I want to hone my craft and maybe to even write that "Great Mormon Novel" we all keep dreaming about. But for the past few months (or more), I've been discouraged with the negative view of the popular Mormon literature that is being published today, coupled with the obvious lack of reading that same literature. Last week, I read _I Hated Heaven._ Now, while I was not impressed with the literary content, the ending, or the portrayal of the Savior, the novel did have some redeeming features and I'm glad I read it. I may have even learned a thing or two. I would recommend it. (But I wouldn't vote on it for the best Mormon novel of the 1990's.) Likewise, I think that most of the novels being published for the Mormon market must have at least one redeeming feature, and while it's important to know why something doesn't work (in the literary sense), it is equally important to know what does work. The same few writers/novels keep coming up on the list for recommendation. I guess what I would like to see is wider study of the popular novels and what is good about them. This is not to say that we should ignore the less popular literary novels, but let's face it, we writers need to pay the bills too and if we can write a great novel AND get paid more than just enough to cover our expenses, it'll be a good thing. More succinctly, we want to write a best-selling novel that is also pleasing to literary critics. (No surprise here, I know.) Is it so terrible to have a happy ending? (Here I have to stop and tell Chris Bigelow that his short story in Irreantum this month ended happily--resolved by a vision no less. Better work on that. ) And I echo the statement someone made earlier that it seems a novel must be negative to our religion (or sell less than two thousand copies) to be considered great on this list. What a terrible thing! I have to wonder why more *best-selling* Mormon authors (best-selling defined as at least five or six thousand copies in the first few months of release) aren't participating on the AML. Are they just too busy? Or are they leery of the constant criticism that doesn't seem to be pointing them in any direction? I honestly don't know, but if I hear the dismissive term "home literature" one more time, I think I'll have a heart-attack, or at the very least spend a week in the mental wing at the hospital. (Maybe not a bad thing since I might get my first complete night of sleep in eleven years.) So what ARE *popular* Mormon authors doing right? And of those things, which are also correct in the eyes of the literary critics? Can you give specific examples? I have some very strong ideas on what will be included in my "Great Mormon Novel" for which I'm gearing up to write. (My file of notes is growing.) But meanwhile, I'm doing at least some things right. I'm writing about issues I feel are vital, and I can barely keep up with my fan mail. That has to say something. Likewise, other Mormon authors are doing the same thing. While I may not agree with or enjoy everything they've written, some of it is DARN good. (And I'm talking here about Mormon authors published with Mormon publishers and read by Mormon readers.) Of course there's room for improvement. There always is. But at least some things are being done correctly. It may be that those who feel the way I do simply don't have time to post. Or they're afraid of being marked as an infidel. (I say this only half-joking, with a picture in my mind of a Mormon literature teacher reading Anita Stansfield's books at night in the bathroom with a flashlight.) My problem has been both of these. But now that my life is returning to normal after baby number five, I'm going to make an attempt to comment a little more on the Mormon novels I've been reading, both popular and literary. Putting in my pennies, I guess. Hope I didn't offend anyone, Rachel ________________________________ Rachel Ann Nunes Author of the best-selling novel To Love and to Promise E-mail: rachel@ranunes.com Web page: http://www.ranunes.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 15:07:04 -0600 From: "Rachel Ann Nunes" Subject: Re: [AML] TARR, _The Gathering Storm_ (Review) >Kenneth R. Tarr, “The Last Days - Volume 1 - The >Gathering Storm” >(c) 1999, Cedar Fort Incorporated >Paperback, 202 pages, $11.99 Now that this book has been reviewed by someone other than me, the author's daughter, I have a few comments to add, and certainly a different perspective. I appreciate the time Jeff took to make his review, but unlike other reviews he's done, I disagree with most of his negative statements. First off, I know for a fact that not only did the author read everything any general authority ever published about the Last Days, he also researched world economics extensively. He also has scriptural/prophetical/economical references for all of the types of disasters and such in the novel. He was very careful to plan what actually could happen, with a decidedly world view instead of just a slice of Utah. No one ever could think that the events of Last Days will happen except on a world level. I loved seeing what Mormons and believers around the world were doing and thinking in the time of turmoil. It came to me that as a Latter-day Saint, I believe things will have to become very very bad before many of the prophecies come true (parents drinking the blood of their own children and the like). _The Gathering Storm_ showed how these things *could* happen. Some of the events were admittedly hard to keep track of, but they all came clearly into play later. Tarr was obviously using the ploy of many national best-sellers by switching quickly to different POV's (in sections or chapters). In chapter four I was so intent on seeing if the dam tender made it to safety, that I couldn't put the book down. And other chapters were equally engrossing. The only real complaint I thought people would have with the book are the literary discussions peppered throughout. The book reads on several different levels and the average reader will miss the intellectual subtitles. It's a book that will make you think, and it's well worth the time to read. A drawback is the very small print they used for the book. The novel should have been at least a hundred pages longer to be comfortable for my eyes, though it's certainly no smaller than some national books I've read. One of the most important things shown in the novel was how the imperfect and sometimes selfish Latter-day Saints pulled together and started living up to their billing as children of God. Meanness, bitterness, and hatred, was overcome with love, sacrifice, and plain hard work. These futuristic Latter-day Saints were much like the pioneers of old. Incidentally, I read the sequel, which has not yet been published, and also liked it a great deal. It will be out sometime later this year. For what it's worth, Rachel ________________________________ Rachel Ann Nunes Author of the best-selling novel To Love and to Promise E-mail: rachel@ranunes.com Web page: http://www.ranunes.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 15:43:21 -0600 From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Selling Your Writing At 07:44 PM 7/3/00 EDT, Lisa Peck wrote: >I'd be interested if anyone else sees other ways Rowlings book fits the >market and other things she did with the book to make it the success that it >is. A friend of mine who has had several books published, including some YA fiction (Sherwood Smith) says that three of the things going for the Harry Potter books are that they are boarding school stories, the protagonist is a downtrodden child who turns out to be someone very special, and they include an interesting new sport. I suspect that the underdog who turns out to be someone special has appeal to almost everyone (it's archetypal, for one thing), and the other aspects have appeal to various people--Lisa may have found the Quidditch games boring, but many young male readers have not. They also fit the growth story format since they start, as Lisa said, with Harry's birth and follow his development into adulthood. (Rite of passage stories also have wide appeal.) Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 16:53:02 -0600 From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: [AML] New Web Version of Review Archive I have been creating a web version of the AML-List Review Archive, and Benson asked me to announce a preview of those pages. You can see the prototype at http://www.xmission.com/~jeffress/aml/index.html I would like to get some feedback on the layout, organization, and user friendly nature of the design. So far, I have converted the first 140-some reviews to the new format and continue to add about 10-20 reviews per day. Once I have converted all the reviews, we (Benson and I) will move the reviews to a permanent home on the AML web site. I will then continue to add any new reviews posted to the list. Jonathan may not want to have the feedback discussion here on the list, so you may send me comments to my personal address. [MOD: Please double-copy any comments to Terry and to the List (unless you want them just to go to Terry.) Whether I send them out over the List or not will depend in large part on List volume. Thanks to Terry, by the way, for doing this. I need to look at this myself and give him my feedback--but I'm on a work deadline and our third baby is due on Saturday, so I haven't had a chance yet.] - -- Terry Jeffress - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 16:42:42 -0600 From: "Bill Willson" Subject: [AML] AAR Agents in Utah? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_009D_01BFE6A0.0A04B620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm just curious. Why do you suppose there are no literary agents = listed in the AAR located in the state of Utah. If there are agents in = Utah where are they listed? - And why wouldn't they list with AAR? Regards, Bill Willson Keep your hand moving and your muse alive. bwillson@mtwest.net=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_009D_01BFE6A0.0A04B620 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm just curious.  Why do you suppose there are = no=20 literary agents listed in the AAR located in the state of Utah.  If = there=20 are agents in Utah where are they listed? - And why wouldn't they list = with=20 AAR?
 
Regards,
Bill Willson
Keep your hand moving = and your=20 muse alive.
bwillson@mtwest.net=20
- ------=_NextPart_000_009D_01BFE6A0.0A04B620-- - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 19:21:11 -0700 (MST) From: Benson Parkinson Subject: Re: [AML] Reviewing New Mormon Fiction Barbara R. Hume wrote: <<<< For several months now, I've been reviewing books for Under the Covers, the largest book review site on the Web that I know of. So far I've done only genre fiction--romances and mysteries. Many kinds of books are reviewed there, however. Today it occurred to me for the first time that maybe I should post reviews of LDS novels there. Right now I'm reading the third Trust Williams novel to review for Jana. Why not put a review up on UTC? >>>> This isn't what you were asking, but I thought I'd better mention to all list subscribers that you need to exercise care in cross-posting identical reviews. In some cases people have posted reviews intended for Irreantum to AML-List, which can cause difficulties for us with the publishers (who have often supplied a second copy for review on the list and might be reluctant to give us both copies in the future if they think they're getting coverage with one). Jana Remy (review editor for both Irreantum and AML-List) was just hammering out a policy on this with Jonathan Langford (list moderator) and Chris Bigelow and me (Irreantum co-managing editors) but left on a trip to England for several weeks before we got it nailed down. I think we all agree there are circumstances where a review could go both ways (as well as to third parties like Under the Covers), but until we can finalize our policies, please check with Jana on cross-posting AML-List or Irreantum reviews. Benson Parkinson Irreantum Co-managing Editor - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 19:53:56 -0600 From: Eileen Subject: Re: [AML] Community Theater - ----- Original Message ----- >Thank you, Neal, for standing up for community theatre! And ALL of you--if >you miss I AM JANE, you will be impoverished! >Sincerely, Marilyn Brown Pardon my ignorance, but how long and what days and times does I AM JANE run? Is that permissable to post or you may email me directly. [MOD: Please feel free to post to the List, as this is an artistic event of general interest.] Eileen eileens99@bigplanet.com "When the freedom they wished for most, was freedom from responsibility then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again." - Edith Hamilton - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 18:56:57 -0700 From: eedh Subject: [AML] _Irreantum_ Magazine Awhile ago, my son called, "Mom, your AML magazine is here!" And now I sit here on my bed, proud and grateful, and slightly discouraged. This Irreantum, what an accomplishment! Thank you Chris and Benson, and everyone else, for all your hard work. It certainly shows. This magazine is impressive! I'm used to chatting with all of you (AML-list feels like chatting to me) in my kitchen, often early in the morning or late at night, about our hopes and fears and flaws--but to see your actual work (the reviews and poetry and essays and fiction), I'm reminded what an illustrious crowd I've been associating with. I think this must be what Paris in the 1920's felt like. Just imagine, I think, these are the Mormon literary movers and shakers, and I'm actually in the midst of them! My son came into the bedroom. "So how was your magazine?" he asked. "It was really good," I said, "but kind of depressing." "Why's that?" he asked. "Well," I said, "these people are like the Philharmonic symphony orchestra, and I'm at the 8th-grade band level." He laughed sympathetically. I'm so grateful for AML-List, and the Irreantum, and the AML writing conferences, and the lunches and dinners (which I have yet to be able to attend!) and for being able to associate with all of you. And again, to everyone involved in the Irreantum: "BRAVO! WELL DONE!!" - -Beth Hatch - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 20:24:18 -0700 From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: Re: [AML] Community Theater Marilyn Brown: > In drama, I think Eric Snider is good in some ways, but he does not >have enough of a literary or theatrical background to do the kind of >criticism I would like to see. Just the other day, I was discussing with a friend the difficulties in writing reviews of community theater. On the one hand, we have readers who don't go to the theater all that often, who like a show that will entertain them, and that's it. Then we have what my friend called the "theater snobs," the people who look for things like symbolism and depth and that sort of thing. Somehow, I have to write reviews for both groups of readers -- reviews that will address the basic factor of whether or not a show is entertaining, as well as whether or not it has merit from a theatrical standpoint, etc. I wish I had more time, and I wish there were more of a place, for more in-depth reviews that would get more into literary and theatrical themes like Marilyn talks about. But there's not really a place for that in newspaper, especially when most readers just want to know, "Will I like it?," and don't care so much about symbolism, etc. (I say this in my own defense, that just because I haven't had a chance to exhibit my literary or theatrical background in this area doesn't necessarily mean I don't have it. :-) ) >Also, he is a potboiler gutsy enough to write the kind of negative >stuff that sells newspapers. And that's important. But it does kill >audiences. This buys into the old myth that people write a certain way to "sell newspapers." Newspapers make money through advertising, not through newspaper sales. Granted, a higher circulation means the ad department can charge more for advertisements, but the fact remains that it's such a long trickling-down for a certain kind of writing to make money for the newspaper in the long run, that a vast majority of newspaper writers don't even think of it. I have no illusions that my writing will make any start subscribing to the paper. Maybe one or two over time, but not many. What we writers hope for, more realistically, is that if our writing is good, people who ALREADY read the paper will start reading our articles, too, when they hadn't previously done so. Also, the idea that negative reviews sell newspapers is completely backwards. Have you read my mail? People hate negative reviews. They seem to think it runs counter to the entire purpose of reviewing to say anything other than positive things. We've LOST subscribers because of negative reviews (and other kinds of negative writing -- not enough "good news" in the paper, etc.). No, the only reason I say anything negative in a review is that I'm trying to give an honest, fair overall assessment of the show. And I am sensitive to the peculiarities of non-professional theater. I rarely mention specific actors as being sub-par; when I do, it's only because they are major characters and their weakness hurts the show as a whole. Minor characters can be bad without doing too much damage. I never criticize children, no matter how bad they are. In almost any show, of course, you can find a whole list of things wrong with it. In a review, I try to determine whether the good outweighs the bad. Usually, it does, which is why 75 percent of my reviews are B-grade or better, with the good being emphasized more than the bad. Some of the bad still has to be mentioned, to give an accurate picture of the play as a whole; to omit it would be a disservice, as it would cause people to think the show was perfect. >We figure we lost our $2,000 on our wonderful FIDDLER largely >because of the review. And not just the review, but the weekly >repeated blurb in the newspaper that kept giving at C grade. But think how much you loved that weekly repeated blurb when it was an A- for "To Kill a Mockingbird." :-) I have yet to be convinced that people in Utah Valley decline seeing a show based solely on my reviews. It would be interesting if I had that kind of power, and I do recognize that there is some power in the press, but I just don't think it works that way. My experience has been that most people who want to see a show will see it anyway. There may be a few undecideds for whom my review pushes them over the edge, but I doubt there are $2,000 worth of people like that. If anything, I think the opposite works: A strongly glowing review might make people consider seeing a show that they had previously not considered. I think in terms of audience turn-out, a positive review has more effect than a negative one. I cannot prove this, of course, but it seems to be the case from what I hear from people. If anything turned people off to "Fiddler," I'd guess it was the 2:45 running time. People know their kids won't sit still for that long, and lots of grown-ups won't, either. >Eric talked about the lights, which he didn't like because they were >dark. (I am confused with that one, because if it's too >light-hearted, wouldn't the lights have been too bright?) From the review: "For as light as this show is figuratively, it's far too dark literally." >At any rate, the lights were dark because of the director's choice, >and after we read the review we did beef them up, which is one good >thing about critics. They can help us make adjustments. However, we >still had the C grade on the Friday schedule throughout the entire >run. Our actors may have made adjustments also but we still had the >C and still lost the $2,000. The thing about the lights is a valid point. I shouldn't have included the words "dimly lit" in the miniature review that ran throughout the show's run. I do need to be careful about not putting in stone things that may have been a problem for just one night, or that may well have been fixed later. Those little reviews that we run every week have been mostly appreciated by our readers, who may have missed the reviews when they first appeared and are looking for a show to see. I recognize the fact that many shows improve over time and would therefore be deserving of a higher grade later on, and I don't know what to do about that. In an ideal world, all shows would be completely polished and ready to go by opening night -- and the New York Times runs capsule reviews of Broadway shows every week, assuming the quality of the show will remain consistent -- but we don't live in an ideal world, at least not currently. So I really don't know what to do about that conflict. Readers want some guidance beyond the first time a review appears, but it's not feasible to send someone to the show mid-way through the run to do a "check up." And, again, this is only a problem when the review is lukewarm. When it says the show is great, no one worries that it might get less-great as time goes on. > >I think Eric is smart. The newspaper world loves him. He has >recieved an important award, and he has been promoted to City >Editor, which merits congratulations. Thank you, but it was Features Editor. City Editor is for people interested in actual NEWS, not the kind of stuff I do. :-) > And I am so grateful he doesn't attend our children's programs. And >may I say that the Villa Theatre has just this last weekend hosted >Margaret Young's I AM JANE. We have talked to people who have come >away wanting to bring all of their friends this next weekend. They >absolutely love this show, and when I looked at it, I could just >outline the negative things Eric could have said. Thank goodness he >did not attend to review, but will attend the last performance. >However, I must also say that his tack is a bit political, as I >could hear dear Margaret pleading with him in her blurb on this >list. And she did communicate with him in private about it. Margaret >is so talented. But this was not a PROFESSIONAL production. She was >doing something entirely different from trying to make Eric sit up >and take notice of the perfection of a piece of art. Due to scheduling conflicts, I couldn't review the show, though I wanted to. (Blame the Utah Shakespearean Festival.) It wasn't because of Margaret's comments here, though I admit, that would have made reviewing it a bit more awkward. I won't be able to see it closing night, either, as another conflict has arisen. There are about 12,000 plays all opening in July, and apparently all on the same couple weekends. > >Let me say just one more word. Eric may be a good critic, but I have >noticed that the up and coming students and journalists think that >he is the perfect example. So they get in there and throw those >negative things around, also, practicing their power and killing >people. I have seen this, too, and it bothers me. Part of it stems from the ongoing myth that all my reviews are negative (don't make me fish out the percentages, but trust me, very few are). The students think I'm negative all the time, and they think I'm a good critic; therefore, they assume that they should be negative all the time, too, if they want to be good like me. This makes two false assumptions: One, that I'm THE critic to follow, and two, that I'm always negative. I've seen the same thing happen with my "Snide Remarks" column. When I wrote it for The Daily Universe, I frequently poked fun at BYU life and culture. I was occasionally rather pointed about it, but more often, it was just light-hearted, "Isn't this silly?" kind of stuff. One wouldn't get the sense that I was an angry young man, lying awake at night mumbling bitterly about all this stuff I HATED about BYU. Yet I would get e-mails from people who read the columns who would vent to me things they hated about BYU -- real, actual HATE, things that surprised me at how angry they were -- and they would say that they were writing to me because they knew I would feel the same way, or whatever. And I was amazed that I was being so grossly misunderstood (which, I guess, is one of the perils of writing satire). In closing, let me say something I've said before. People in the theater community have the same goals I have: to make theater better. I haven't always been as good about this, and I'm still getting better over time, but I really do try to phrase my negative comments so they sound more like constructive criticism than sarcastic slams or personal attacks. (Watch them closely: I might be glib sometimes in reviews, to keep the writing lively and the reader interested, but I avoid sarcasm when I get down to the delicate matter of criticizing.) I have received e-mails from people -- from one of Marilyn's "Fiddler" cast members, for example -- thanking me for what they perceived as insightful comments that really motivated them to do better. I've received plenty of angry mail, too, but it's always heartening to see that a performer and I are on the same wavelength, both trying to make things as good as we can, one of us from within the show and one of us from without. I hope Marilyn knows that I admire the work she and Bill have done in the theater world of Springville. They have heart and dedication, which counts for a lot in this business. Eric D. Snider - -- *************************************************** Eric D. Snider www.ericdsnider.com "Filling all your Eric D. Snider needs since 1974." - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:27:05 -0700 From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: Re: [AML] Defending the Romance Genre >[MOD: I know of at least one other LDS historical romance writer: Elizabeth >Lane, whom I worked with at Wicat. I know she published several novels with >various publishers that went out of print, and is now in the middle of a >three-novel contract (I think) with Harlequin. I read only a few small >selections of one of her books--romance *isn't* my genre, I'm afraid--but >she was a very bright person, a good and imaginative writer of educational >software materials (I was her editor at times), and I rather imagine that >she's good at the type of writing she does.] Several of us found each other on romance writers' mailing lists. We started a list on eGroups called LDSRomanceWriters. There are fewer than a dozen at this point, but I imagine there are quite a few who haven't found us yet. I hope we can find Elizabeth Lane. I haven't read many Harlequin Historicals, but I understand some of them are quite good. barbara hume - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:09:57 -0500 From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Glossary (was: Writing About Religion) Jason, I should have held my hand. You explained yourself well in intervening posts. The main problem of "jargonized" terminology (this word invention IS fun) is when Mormon writers wrap up spirituality in word packets, and this is something the culture does a lot (Example: "What a choice spirit . . ." and "I know this church is true . . . "). We have and use a cultural shorthand that keeps us from being able to communicate to others. It is so common to us that we don't know when we are lapsing into it, at it's worst these conventions keep us from truly understanding our own faith. We become overly-familiarized to it, the way Viktor Shklovsky uses the term. When that happens--in life or in fiction--he suggests, we are open for moral disintegration. Todd Robert Petersen - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 01:19:42 -0700 From: "Katrina Duvalois" Subject: RE: [AML] Defending the Romance Genre I'm sorry if I offended you, but we were talking about _best-selling authors_ and as I have not heard of any of the writers you requested I read, I don't believe that they fall under this category. They may fall under that genre as _best-selling_, but not on the N.Y. or L.A. times top 10 best fiction. I also read other fiction, i.e., Barbara Kingsolver is an excellent writer, but I didn't site her or her work. _Romance_, as I write it, is neither a bodice ripper or advocates casual sex. Since Romance appears to also have an offshoot as what you called _women's fiction_, then I suppose that is what I write. And the last Nora Roberts book I read did have a scene with a bodice being ripped, therefore the tongue-in-cheek reference. I enjoy historical romance immensely, but many of them aren't considered _best-selling_. I was introduced to Georgette Heyer in college and read every book I could get my hands on. I loved it! I have since found other authors, but am not currently reading historical romance as that is not what I write. That was not was I was talking about and I'm sorry, I seemed to have hit a nerve. I also did not mean to say that ALL ROMANCE WRITERS are bad/poor writers, what I said was that to be a _best-selling_ romance writer you don't have to write well; as you stated: _but a writer with something like 70 million books in print must know something we don't._ I made a stereotype and I think that is what was misunderstood. My statement _and there aren't too many good writers out there writing Romance._ should read _and there aren't too many good writers out there writing _best-selling_ mainstream romance._ That is exactly the reason I started reading Nora Roberts novels. That is also the reason I have read LaVyrl Spencer, I am trying to round out my reading/writing. Those are the examples I used to portray _best-selling_ writing that is not necessarily good. And, in that genre (whatever you want to call it) _romance_, _mainstream women's fiction_, the really good writers don't seem to get as much attention. I do, however, disagree with your general statement that: _Mainstream writers do not satisfy the requirement that romance readers want: the HEA (happily ever after) ending._ Nora Roberts, Danielle Steel, LaVyrl Spencer all have happily ever after endings (the ones I've read anyway) so this apparently does not apply to all the novels lumped into _mainstream romance/women's fiction._ I think this does apply to novels by Barbara Taylor Bradford, Colleen McCulloch, etc. which I think does fall under the genre of _women's fiction_. Finally, I thank you for giving me a list of new authors to read that you consider talented. I have been disappointed by the _best-selling_ mainstream authors I have read and would like to read some romance that is neither trite nor predictable. Since I have yet to be published, I am still searching for the style and genre within genre that I am comfortable with. Generally, I call it Romance, but where exactly within that genre I am as yet unsure. Katrina Duvalois - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 05:12:58 -0700 From: "lynn gardner" Subject: RE: [AML] New Mormon Fiction Subject: RE: [AML] New Mormon Fiction > > >Add me to the list who attended BYU - a hundred years ago. Lynn Gardner > > Please tell us -- What was Brigham Young _really like?_ ;)> Darvell Do you mean the man (my great-great-great-grandfather - by first wife, first child) or the school which was not half the size it is now?? Lynn Gardner - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: (No, or invalid, date.) From: "Marilyn & William Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Defending the Romance Genre I was glad to hear someone mention Elizabeth Lane. Long ago she was in = my writer's group, and I have always admired her fortitude to just go rig= ht ahead and make some money on the "romance" market. She always sold her= work, and she has written a LOT of it! We always enjoyed what she wrote= . Where is she now? Is she still working at WICAT? (I worked there once = long ago, too). Marilyn Brown [MOD: Wicat is defunct--bought out by Jostens Learning, who eventually closed the Utah offices and laid off almost everyone that came over from Wicat. I think Elizabeth is now working for another Utah educational software company.] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 10:18:37 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Andrew's Poll Rachel Ann Nunes wrote: > > [MOD: Let me simply clarify that this poll has nothing to do with the AML > awards, which are, I believe, decided upon by a selected jury/judges. This > poll is designed only to reflect the opinions of those willing to cast a > vote on AML-List.] > > As a full-time writer and best-selling novelist in the Mormon market, I have > watched this poll with some interest (and, I have to admit, some amusement). > While I have read most everything that has been nominated or mentioned on > this list, I get the distinct feeling that this is not true with many of the > voters. How then can we compare novels and choose one to represent us if we > have not read what is out there? Not only that but how can we hope to ever compare such diverse works as mentioned on the list. For instance, _Backslider_ and _Arriana_ address two entirely different audiences. Those who've read Levi's work are probably not the audience for Rachel's books, and vice versa. They not only address a different audience but require a different set of critical tools. Using the critical tools necessary to understand Levi Peterson virutally guarantees that Rachel Nunes will be seen as a hack of the highest order. Using the tools required for Rachel's books makes Levi Peterson inaccessessible, boring, and "literary." I would prefer seeing something like: Best LDS Romance Novel of the 90's, or Best Literary Novel. Then you can compare more easily Nunes to Stansfield, or Peterson to Sillito. Thom - - 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 #93 *****************************