From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #211 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 Friday, December 1 2000 Volume 01 : Number 211 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:29:45 -0700 From: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) on 11/29/00 6:47 PM, Scott Tarbet at starbet@timp.net wrote: >We were told that the committee members were selected from those who >had responded to PVP's request for submittals of productions for the new >theatre facility, > As to the whys and wherefores of keeping the names confidential, I would > speculate (and that's all it is) that the Church is very well aware that any > playwright to whom this plum fell would be an instant celebrity in Mormondom > and their career in priestcraft (;-d) would be secure. With confidentiality > it is what the Brethren want it to be: a calling and a labor of love. > Scott, I hope you don't mind my responding again to this idea--I want to make it clear that I'm not responding from a "sour grapes" point of view. I was among those musicians and playwrights who responded to that call. My Christmas show proposal was one which the previous administration of PVP was excited about--in fact I was paid (as were others) to do a treatment and demo several songs from the proposed production. When the change in administration came, the new administration was NOT excited about my idea--and they had every right not to be. I was frankly surprised that it had even been considered, since it was definitely not in the mainstream "pageant" or "correlatable" category. It's an idea I dearly love and which gives me considerable delight to contemplate. I'll write it within the next two years and hope to find audiences both in and out of the church who might enjoy it. I am thrilled that the church is putting on a production at all and only wish the best to those writing it. It's just hard to wish anonymous people well, which is why I ask. Evidentally some names have been printed in the program--this makes me happy since I know who to be happy for. > Folks, this is a huge experiment fraught with risks that the Brethren are > undertaking, and certain of them are without a doubt viewing it with a > jaundiced eye. "Art" isn't correlatable, and what they are doing comes > perilously close to art. But it's most definitely not art -- it's > missionary work and it's perfecting the Saints. We have to remember that if > the experiment is going to work, giving faithful LDS artists opportunities > for Church service qua live-theatre-but-not-quite-art and exposing many > thousands of non-theatre-goers to the live experience, broadening still > other opportunites, we have got to give it a chance. If we as an arts > community within the larger LDS community rip it to shreds, this new > opportunity will become even more circumscribed and may disappear > altogether. I haven't seen the show yet (it was sold out already when I tried to get tickets), so I cannot comment on it specifically. But Scott, are you really saying that if a show--any show--is bad, critics shouldn't say so, just because those involved meant well? I don't think that attitude improves and furthers LDS art or even missionary work, nor does it do much to perfect the saints. Just some thoughts. :-) Steve P. S. I am glad the church has sponsored a new work--even issued callings, evidentally, to get it written. With repeated calls from everyone from Orson Pratt, to President Packer to President Kimball, to Elder Ballard, and a new state-of-the-art theater; wouldn't it be a crime if it were mostly filled with stake productions of "Annie," "My Fair Lady," etc, which could just as well be done in any stake center cultural hall? - -- skperry@mac.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:32:00 -0700 From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Irreantum Fiction On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:20:23 -0700, Gae Lyn Henderson wrote: >Your criteria in distinguishing between these two "types" of stories is = not >clear to me. There are elements in Peterson's story that might disturb = some >LDS readers--the story includes profanity and a discussion of the wife's >sexual immorality. It also has a husband who is disaffected from the = church >and who claims to not believe any more. The deaths of his family = members >have brought him to that state of being. He is perhaps even more = challenged >by the deaths he encounters than is the protagonist in Rawlins' story. = He >chooses a wife that represents his moving away from the church. Is this= the >behavior of a faithful member? Even he admits near the end of the = story, "I >am not worthy." No it is not the behavior of a faithful member. So what? I have never claimed that I want stories that are only about faithful members. = Frankly, by the end, we realize that he isn't even a very nice guy--or at least = that he hasn't been. And a side note--he never claims he doesn't believe anymore. He just claims that it became too much to bear. A feeling = anyone in the church can relate to on one level or another, whether they let = that feeling drive them inactive or not. And yes, he *is* more challenged by = the deaths in his family than the nameless narrator of Rawlins' story. And = he let it drive him all the way out of the church. But it is a truer story because at least it deals with the gospel at all. And at least it = doesn't have a supposedly faithful father who apparently doesn't have enough = faith to actually *do* anything with the gospel. >But I'm guessing that the reason you find this a "faithful" story is = because >the wife accidentally discovers his Mormoness and begins to experience >conversion. You are implying that I require swinging-door literature to be satisfied. That somebody has to be converted because they are good or fall away = because they are bad for it to ring true. That is not the case. I liked = Peterson's story because the core assumption is that the Gospel is true and that it works in the lives of real people. Kate went looking and she found = answers. Is that so hard to believe? Are we not allowed to have people actually = find what they are looking for? > And she makes the assumption that the husband still believes at >some level, even though he won't admit it. But he *does* admit it, just not in words. That's part of the power of = this story and of Peterson's art. Aaron is a jerk. And he has certainly left the church and is, as he claims, unworthy. But he still believes as = shown in his wearing garments and in adhering to standards that are no longer a part of his church affiliation. To me, Kate isn't making any = assumptions, she is gaining insights. Insights perfectly justified in the context of = the story and valuable to the character I care about. >I just don't think dividing fiction into "faithful" and "unfaithful" >categories is an easy task. I also think it would be rather odd if = stories >were ranked on that basis for order of publication. An apparently >"faithless" story may offer up truth. But we can't know that unless we = are >willing to examine it carefully and think about it searchingly. That = kind >of thinking is good practice for any kind of moral decision-making. I agree that dividing fiction into faithful and unfaithful is difficult, = but *I* have gotten to the point where *I* have to begin making that distinction. And I am at the point where I need to make that distinction before I read the story. I am *so* tired of the faithless depictions of = LDS faithful and resolutionless stories. I hate "Faith of the Fathers" = because there is *no* faith in it. The father never once displays faith or gets help from his faith or even hindered by his faith. The faith just is not present at all. And his supposed insight at the end is no more true or heartening than "Jeremy was called home" is. It's as much a cliche as = any of the other answers given to Elizabeth already, it's just the opposite cliche. I don't know if stories can or should be ranked/placed based on their faithfulness, but I think that stories *can* and should be ranked best to worst and I think that Peterson's story was better than Rawlins' on any scale I can think of. It was better written, it was a more engaging = story, the characters were more interesting, and the insight was truer. Add on that Rawlins' story is the same kind of story you already find in at = least two other LDS publications and I think that I would be very firm in = giving "The House" precedence over "Faith of the Fathers". That it wasn't given that precedence leads me to believe that quality of story was not what = made the placement decision--or at least that my idea of quality varies significantly from the editors' idea of quality. Which again leads to my distrust of the editorial policies for Fiction in Irreantum, the point of= my thread. It leads me to suspect that if (when) the slush pile at = Irreantum grows large enough, and they are staring at plenty of "Faith of the = Fathers" that those are the stories that will be presented at the expense of = better stories like "The House". That said, I would like to take this opportunity to reflect on what = Jonathan said earlier. Fiction is a very small portion of the offerings of Irreantum. I will by no means unsubscribe from the publication even if I= do get to the point where I wont read any of their fiction. It is a very worthwhile publication and one I am proud to have delivered to my home = every quarter. I am extremely grateful for the hard work put forth by the = editors even if I don't agree with their decisions all the time. Frankly, I have yet to find *anyone* I agree with all the time. Which is kind of a = relief if you think about it... Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:38:23 +0000 From: Kellene Adams Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) I'm fairly new to the list (about a month or so), and have remained quiet but interested (and extremely intimidated!) as I've become familiar with the the list. However, as I've read postings one thought has come to my mind fairly often. It came once again as I've read the thoughts on _Savior of the World_ and I wanted to interject it here. We as writers/artists are, generally speaking, a fairly opinionated and confident group. Which is good; we have to be in order to put our personal creations in the public domain for scrutiny and criticism. This drama, as well as much of the material out there produced by LDS artists, stimulates emotion and feelings in a great many people. People cry, ponder, pray, even change their lives, as a result of Jack Weyland books (I know, because I know some of those people) and the Legacy films and even heavily correlated material. While we might not consider it great art (and it's good that we don't, because we need to stretch and push the envelope and offer people deeper and richer stuff), I think it's important that we don't diminish or demean those people (who actually may represent the majority of LDS audiences) who are moved and touched and changed by what we might call milquetoast. Now having said that, I feel like the list is one place where LDS writers and creators ought to be able to say what they think without having to carefully weigh words. I just wanted to share this one thought that has come to me repeatedly as I've read the list. . . Kellene Ricks Adams [MOD: I'm splitting off a brief bio as a separate post for the sake of consistency in thread titles.] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:38:23 +0000 From: Kellene Adams Subject: [AML] Introductions: Kellene Adams A brief bio: Graduated from BYU in 1988, worked two years at the Deseret News, seven years at the Ensign (so I'm very familiar with heavily correlated material), three years as communications writer for a nutritional/network marketing company, and freelance as editor/writer for a national scrapbooking magazine. Served a mission to Hong Kong, have two young children, and thank you for your patience as I strive to become as educated and informed as the rest of you. Kellene Ricks Adams - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 11:55:56 -0700 From: Eileen Stringer Subject: Re: [AML] LAAKE, _Secret Cermonies_ > >A shame that her book was (is still?) used by ASU in a > >course exploring different contemporary religions from > >the female perspective. > > Why? Laake's female. Her POV is just that: her POV. And it's just as > valid as anyone else's experience with the Church. > > Thom Duncan I agree with your point Thom, up to the point where it is used as a general overall female experience with the Church. As long as it is used as her POV only then I am fine with it, but if it is used to generalize how women are treated by the Church, then it loses validity. Laake does not speak for me and sometimes I fear that POV's such as hers are used a such. Eileen Stringer eileens99@bigplanet.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:27:10 -0700 From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Shaken Faith and Truth On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:04:15 -0700, Scott Tarbet wrote: >I maintain it is possible to be a faithful Mormon and therefore worthy = of >depiction and still be a struggling straggler. AAMOF I think the = majority >of us(the 87.5% figure was pulled out of thin air for purposes of the >discussion, obviously) fit better in that category than in the Super = Mormon >category, and that the truest depiction for the majority therefore is a >depiction of struggle, not of virtual perfection. I have never claimed that our literature should consist of or depict only the Super Mormon or virtual perfection. This is not my argument. All I am asking for is that the Gospel, God, or the Spirit have *some* role in a story that claims to be representative of the LDS experience. We all struggle, but we had better= be striving for the influence of the Gospel, God, or the Spirit or what is = the point? And a story that purports to be about faith and the church and = yet neglects any movement by the Gospel, God, or the Spirit is not going to reach me or ring true. Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:47:14 -0700 From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] Anti-Intellectualism Scott Parkin made the following distinction: > Rather than "uneducated," perhaps I should have used > "uneducable" in some of those places. It's one thing to be short of > knowledge, it's another to be unwilling to seek new knowledge. Just a small connection that popped into my head (of course, everyone else probably connected the dots, too, but for what it's worth): I seem to recall Scott's distinction above as essentially the defentition of one who is not humble (or "teachable"). In a sense, then, much of this discussion of "intellectuals" and "stupid" people is all about those who are or are not humble. The term "humble" is one that is rarely, in my opinion, really looked at closely. Generally when we think about a humble person we picture someone who talks like the scriptures and who prays six times a day. This discussion has made another aspect of humility a bit clearer to me. I hadn't thought about it in terms of what art I am willing to invest the energy to "get" (among other things). Thanks, guys. Annette Lyon ________________________________________________________ 1stUp.com - Free the Web Get your free Internet access at http://www.1stUp.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 14:16:19 -0700 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] LAAKE, _Secret Cermonies_ >I agree with your point Thom, up to the point where it is used as a general >overall female experience with the Church. As long as it is used as her POV >only then I am fine with it, but if it is used to generalize how women are >treated by the Church, then it loses validity. Laake does not speak for me >and sometimes I fear that POV's such as hers are used a such. > >Eileen Stringer >eileens99@bigplanet.com I wonder if there's any way to get around the possibility of a reader NOT reading more into a story than was there. During one of the post-production discussions of my play _Matters of the Heart_, a commenter walked out in a huff making it clear to everyone within earshot that, as far as he was concerned, the play was suggesting that ALL stake presidents were as close-minded as the character in my play. There were only three people in the show, the SP, his liberal son, and the mother. I don't know where he got the idea I was making a statement about all church leaders. But people extrapolate, sometimes against our best efforts as writers. You and I certainly saw the subjective POV in Laake's book, but mayber other Mormons and some non-Mormons didn't, the former assuming she's writing an anti-Mormon book, the latter assuming her experience is universal. FWIW, Laake painted with a pretty broad brush, implying for all she was worth that all Mormon men want to subjugate women, but, if you know anything about human nature, you know that no group of people on earth is as monolythic as she paints them to be. Thom - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:36:46 -0700 (MST) From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: [AML] Local Utah Artist Christmas CD (Shameless Self-Promotion) Hello to everyone on the AML-list and LDSF! My band Organic Greens just got their first cut on a Christmas CD of local Utah artists. The CD "Timpanogos Christmas" also contains acts such as Ryan Shupe and the Rubberband, Shane Jackman, Fiddlesticks, Cherie Call and Peter Breinholdt - 17 songs in all. It's a very eclectic collection. It was created under the auspicies of the Timapnogos Singer/Songwriter Alliance (TSSA) who also brought you the limited edition Food and Care Coaltion/Freedom Festival 200 CD "Bottle Rockets and Lemonade." Anyway the CDs are TEN BUCKS ($10) each. There may be a few copies floating around at some local stores, but the only real way to get the CD (as it really wasn't produced on any label - but was compiled by several of the artists working together) is from the artists on the CD. Such as - you can get some from me. Or you can go to any of the following shows and buy some there also - Dec. 1st an 15th at the Read Leaf in Springville Dec. 7th at the BYU varsity theatre Dec. 14th at the UVSC Ragan Theatre showtimes are 7 pm. Organic Greens will be at the Dec. 1st and 7th shows. If you are out of town or state and want a copy you can email me and i'll mail it to you (of course you have to pay for it, though). check out these websites for more info and track listings: http://organicgreens.freeyellow.com http://www.timpanogos.org - --Ivan Wolfe - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 14:14:20 -0700 From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) [Moderator's compilation of two of Scott's posts.] I said: > > we have got to give it a chance. If we as an arts > > community within the larger LDS community rip it to shreds, this new > > opportunity will become even more circumscribed and may disappear > > altogether. And Steve said: > But Scott, are you really saying that if a show--any show--is bad, critics > shouldn't say so, just because those involved meant well? I don't think > that attitude improves and furthers LDS art or even missionary work, nor > does it do much to perfect the saints. Oh geez! Absolutely not! My comment wasn't meant to stifle criticism. Or Criticism either ;-). Neither did I mean to excuse or promote performance mediocrity in the name of correlation. But SOTW has to be viewed and reviewed as what it is, not as something else. Reviewing "Testaments" is a very different exercise from reviewing "Ben Hur". Sure they're both celluloid and employ a number of the same crafts and trades, but after that the similarities peter out. "Les Mis" and "SOTW" both employ many of the same crafts and trades too, but their aims are vastly different, and they should be viewed and reviewed through different lenses. So is SOTW good theatre, by a Broadway definition? Nope. It would close out of town. Or get ridden out of town on a rail. Or something. Is it good perfecting the Saints missionary work? Yep. Very. That's what the patron wanted, and that's what the patron got. - -- Scott Tarbet > -----Original Message----- > From: Thom Duncan > > >If we as an arts > >community within the larger LDS community rip it to shreds, this new > >opportunity will become even more circumscribed and may disappear > >altogether. > > Suppose you were a plumber and the Church asks you to come fix > the plumbing > in a temple. Only you don't get to decide when the job is really done. A > committee who knows nothing about plumbing comes in looks over your > shoulder. At each point, you are given notes: "Don't use that > wrench. Use > this one." You're an experienced plumber and you know that the > wrench they > want you to use is too small and you will end up with an inferior > product." > I can't imagine any plumber worth his toolbox would sit still for such > abuse. I don't think artists should either. As an actor I'm actually very used to directors and producers and and writers and theatre owners telling me which wrench to use. And I often disagree with them, sometimes vigorously. As a director I'm very used to telling actors which wrench to use and having them disagree with me. But ultimately I have a vision of what I want the final product to be, and while I will try my best to explain that vision and get the actor to share it, if after all s/he still doesn't, then my creative vision is the one that will prevail. The producer of SOTW is the Church, in the person of the Brethren assigned to the task. They had a creative vision before they authorized the project, and I don't see a thing wrong with them exercising oversight. - -- Scott Tarbet - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:21:24 -0700 From: Steve Subject: [AML] Spiritual Passion in Art (was: _Savior of the World_) on 11/30/00 10:35 AM, Eric R. Samuelsen at ersamuel@byugate.byu.edu wrote: > Instead they chose to make Jesus boring. I don't get it. I don't get how > that's supposed to strengthen testimonies. > Eric, This made me actually jump up and down saying "Yes! Yes!" Presentations about the life of Christ, especially his last week, are often called "Passions" or "Passion Plays" and for good reason. I need that passion in my life--it takes a lot of spiritual passion to get my wife and I up to lead our 4 less-than-enthusiatic elementary and pre-school children in reading and discussing the scriptures every morning. (Luckily for us, the scriptures themselves and the heart-felt cries and admonitions of prophets past are often passionate enough to help me discover some sparks of relevance for these recalcitrant youths I love.) I need that spiritual energy flowing into me as often as possible to keep me going. I long to connect with it at church, though those moments are less frequent than I'd like, despite my constant attempts. Most often the connection is found and I am fed and recharged through spiritually passionate music (from all genres and most denominations--almost never LDS recordings). Nearly as often I find it in live theater well done. Less often I find it through literature, though that may not be the case for most of you on a literary list! :-) I am not talking about frenzied enthusiasm, showmanship, or flashing lights. In simplicity I often find that moment which though still and small can pierce to the very core. To make the life, the mission, or the personage of Jesus boring seems to render ineffective the medicine most needed for the ills of the world. The recent proliferation of warmly glowing "beauty parlor Savior" paintings (fresh from a good shampoo, clip, and blowdry) have sent me on a search for other images of Christ from other eras--even the dark-circled eyes of Byzantine icons. I hope I never write anything about Jesus without enough fervor, testimony, trained technique, and unselfconsciousness that people will find it "nice, okay, bland," rather than being either be spiritually thrilled and lifted, or hate it (and probably me). God himself said he'd spew the lukewarm out of his mouth. Now there's an image that needs painting and printing in the Ensign! Now there's a helpful and passionate image that wouldn't pass correlation! :-) Steve - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:35:18 -0700 From: "Jim Cobabe" Subject: Re: [AML] Shaken Faith and Truth Tom Matkin: - --- It takes me on a vacuous journey in a tight circle. - --- Ah!--REAL LIFE(TM). - --- Jim Cobabe _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:55:46 -0700 From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] Shaken Faith and Truth > I have never claimed that our literature should consist of or depict only > the Super Mormon or virtual perfection. This is not my argument. > All I am asking for is that the Gospel, > God, or the Spirit have *some* role in a story that claims to be > representative of the LDS experience. We all struggle, but we > had better be > striving for the influence of the Gospel, God, or the Spirit or > what is the > point? And a story that purports to be about faith and the church and yet > neglects any movement by the Gospel, God, or the Spirit is not going to > reach me or ring true. > > Jacob Proffitt I agree with your point as far as it goes, that a story purporting to be about the faith, the religious aspects of being a Mormon, needs to have the Gospel, God, and/or the Spirit in it. But it *is* possible, and I hope something that we'll begin to see more of, for stories about Mormons to be about the way our unique subculture operates and the way it affects our lives. Stories about Irish Catholics don't have to center on how and when they pray, and I don't think there is any reason ours have to either. We have a unique and interesting subculture, with tons of wonderful stories to be told. - -- Scott Tarbet - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:39:16 -0500 From: Richard Johnson Subject: Re: [AML] LAAKE, _Secret Cermonies_ At 06:12 PM 11/29/2000 -0800, you wrote: >still remain in my mind. I read several books a year >and they sort of come and go through my consciousness, > >but there is something about the images Laake's word >conjured that has had staying power. > >[Kathleen Meredith] >__________________________________________________ Interesting. I read the book, felt a lot of pity for anyone so self invloved that her wedding was miserable because of a self conjured image of an affront to her personal beauty and who never seemed to accept any responsibilty for any of here actions, then forgot it. . . until this discussion dredged some memories back. Of course I'm a male, but I gave the book to my wife, who read for almost an hour before she threw it the ground in disgust. I asked her what was wrong and she made some comment about swimming in self pity. Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:21:16 -0700 From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Eric Samuelsen, I just love reading what you write, even when (or maybe especially when) we disagree strenuously. I get to the end of your posts and feel like I've had a nice spicy intellectual meal. No need for your helmet. Nothing incoming. Gotta love this list. In one thread I'm arguing that the majority of us aren't super Mormons and shouldn't expect to be portrayed that way, and in this one I find myself cast as the defender of orthodoxy and correlation. Gotta love life's little ironies. As I mentioned before, I auditioned for SOTW, and spent four long nights there and in call-backs, before David and Eric decided they wouldn't use me, presumably (I hope I hope) because of my stated rehearsal conflicts with performances of another show. So I read SOTW as it then stood. I performed a number of segments of it in audition. It isn't drama in the conventional sense, it isn't risky or cutting edge -- it is supposed testimonies of people who knew the Savior during his mortal ministry. To my absolute amazement I came away from that grueling and otherwise profitless audition experience spiritually fed. On that level it worked very well indeed, at least for me. So in the case of this particular actor scorned, I have no hard feelings whatsoever, and I wish I had been privileged to be in the show. I'm sure many of the audience members will be even more spiritually fed than I was. Eric, I assume that you probably won't be one of them, since you're going with your mind already made up that it's drek and a waste of time. A few points: PERIL. No, there is no artistic or financial peril in SOTW, which is no more important than the lack of peril in the Young Women In Excellence Worldwide Celebration I attended the other night at my local stake center. But I am supposing that the Brethren perceive at least some institutional peril in involving the Church in the sponsorship of live theatre, and if there's one thing no bureaucracy likes, it's any whiff of institutional peril. They're doing something that could be perceived as "artsy", and I don't know of a single one of those intentionally orthodox, fine, upstanding, conservative men who would be comfortable having the adjective "artsy" within a country mile of his emminent self. Twice in my life in recommend interviews I have had bishops question me closely on moral issues, including my sexual orientation, with no other reason than that I'm a theatre person and there's a frequent automatic assumption that we're a bunch of libertines. Yes, there's an institutional bias in the Church against arts and artists. THE FORM: I think we need a new term for material like SOTW. Maybe "devotional stage presentation" or something of the sort? Because it's not really a pageant or a play, and content-wise we can't compare it to Shakespeare or Broadway-style productions. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have considerable merit of its own. If the production values that ultimately came out on the stage are lacking, that's one thing, but I don't think a criticism of the content of the presentation comparing it with non-faith-promoting forms is valid. THE MORMON SHAKESPEARE: No, the Mormon Shakespeare's plays won't be produced on the Conference Center Theatre stage -- at least not for the first couple of hundred years after s/he dies ;-). But does that make the venue and the presentations done there without merit? There is a great deal that can be done there, including exposing many thousands of people to live theatre who otherwise wouldn't come any closer than driving past the Capitol Theatre on their way to a Jazz game. I'd hazard a guess that the Mormon Shakespeare's plays will be performed in venues that don't even exist yet, because as a people we don't yet support enough live, LDS-oriented theatre to allow much of anybody to make a living at it. DAVID WARNER, CHAMPION OF ORTHODOXY: David came to all the auditions and call-backs dressed in a very conservative suit, white shirt, and tie. The jacket stayed on. In 4 decades on the stage I had never seen such a thing from a director. (I thought he was auditioning for the part of a mission president or a rising young Church bureaucrat ;-)). And he stood up and told everyone at the first night of call-backs that the Brethren were part of every decision regarding this show and were overseeing it closely and personally. He set the tone of correlation and orthodoxy from the get-go. So any gripe from a cast member that the show was sanitized after the fact shows a failing of memory or attention. - -- Scott Tarbet - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:43:13 -0500 From: Richard Johnson Subject: Re: [AML] Shaken Faith and Truth At 01:08 AM 11/30/2000 -0700, you wrote: >Scott Tarbet wrote: > >> Rather than looking for a depiction of how faithful Mormons >> should/would/could act, isn't it much more telling and true to the Mormon >> experience to depict us as the majority of us really are? > >No, it's more telling and true for the author to create whatever >characters he wants to create, then make them feel realistic, and be >true to the personality of those characters throughout the story. >Characters "should" not be anything--faithful members who do much of >what's expected of them, mediocre members who do some but fail at a lot, >inactive members who do nothing, bitter former members who attack the >church. Any of these characters "should" be written about, depending on >what the author wants to do. To say our literature should depict only a >certain type of Mormon, even one in the majority, is merely a form of >political correctness. I loathe political correctness. > >-- >D. Michael Martindale >dmichael@wwno.com > A double Amen to that. (one who has suffered though 36 years in academia, the deepest center of political correctness. - Actually I enjoyed every minute of being the center of negative reaction almost everytime I opened my mouth outside the classroom or the rehearsal hall.) Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 00:03:00 EST From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Elder Oaks Dedicates New Washington DC Temple Visitors' Center Theater: Jane Dumont From: Jane Dumont To: Mormon News Subject: MN Elder Oaks Dedicates New Washington DC Temple Visitors' Center Theater: Jane Dumont 28Nov00 D1 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 23:20:00 -0500 [From Mormon-News] Elder Oaks Dedicates New Washington DC Temple Visitors' Center Theater WASHINGTON, DC -- Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles presided and offered the dedicatory prayer for the Washington D.C. Temple Visitors' Center Rededication and Dedication of the Theater on Tuesday, November 28, 2000, at the Center in Kensington, Md. Elder David E. Salisbury, Visitors' Center Director, conducted the program and spoke about the history and purpose of the visitors' center. Sid Foulger, the benefactor and builder of the theater, related how the theater was "created by a committee." He also commented on his 38 year history of work on the Washington D.C. Temple from the ground breaking in 1962, the temple dedication in 1974, to the present renovation of the center along with the new theater. Washington D.C. Temple President Sterling D. Colton offered the opening prayer. "The Testaments of One Fold and One Shepherd" was previewed prior to the dedication ceremony. This film will be shown twice daily beginning in January 2001. The film, "Legacy," is currently shown twice a day and will continue to be shown in 2001. The 23rd Annual Festival of Lights, Trees and Music will be held in the new theater and begin Thursday, December 1 with 30 minute performances nightly at 7 and 8 p.m. during December. Musical presentations scheduled throughout the year will now be held on the theater's stage. ___________________________________________________________ ____ NOTES FROM THE PRINTED PROGRAM ____ As the Washington, D.C. Temple was nearing completion in 1974, the decision was made to construct a Visitors' Center on the temple site. The building was completed in June of 1976 and because it was the bicentennial year, Church officials decided to dedicate the center on July 3rd, the nearest possible date to the nation's birthday. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir was present and the dedicatory prayer was offered by President Spencer W. Kimball. A major modification took place in early 1986 and on June 4, 1988, after further remodeling, the unveiling of the Christus statue was held with Elder Dallin H. Oaks as the speaker. The Visitors' Center was closed from January 1 to August 1, 1999, for extensive remodeling, redecorating and the installation of many new state-of-the-art exhibits. Shortly after the Center was reopened, ground was broken for the new 544 seat film and performing arts theater which, along with the rededication of the visitors' center, is being dedicated this evening. VISITORS' CENTER DIRECTORS Clarence E. Stoker (Barbara) 1976-78 Donald P. Lloyd (Helen) 1978-79 Wayne A. Reeves (Madge) 1979-81 Ralph Hill (Afton) 1981-82 Ray Loughton (Elsa) 1982-83 Robert E. Sackley (Marjorie) 1983-85 Elmo P. Humphreys (Amy) 1985-86 Richard Grant Rees (Dorothy) 1986-87 David S. Hatch (Barbara) 1987-89 Bruce E. Belnap (Phyllis) 1989-90 Roland R. Wright (Marjorie) 1991-93 Spencer F. Jenson (Joyce) 1993-95 Don L. Christensen (Marva) 1995-97 F. MacRay Christensen (Joan) 1997-99 David E. Salisbury (Carol) 1999-01 >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - - 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 #211 ******************************