From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #292 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, April 2 2001 Volume 01 : Number 292 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 17:15:37 -0700 From: "ROY SCHMIDT" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors Well, some once referred to Mike Quinn as "former Mormon intellectual, Michael Quinn." Roy Schmidt >>> Brown 03/30/01 10:25AM >>> If there were another way to do it, that might be fine. I hate the word "disaffected," but what about "past" or "disengaged," "past friend of the LDS Church?" I'm just shooting off at the mouth. Someone else, please come up with something. Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 18:02:49 -0600 From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Bestsellers: "Expressions of Faith" Repeats at #1, "First Vision" Debuts at #3: Kent Larsen From: Kent Larsen To: Mormon News Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 23:00:00 -0500 Subject: MN Bestsellers: "Expressions of Faith" Repeats at #1, "First Vision" Debuts at #3: Kent Larsen 29Mar01 A4 [From Mormon-News] Bestsellers: "Expressions of Faith" Repeats at #1, "First Vision" Debuts at #3 NEW YORK, NEW YORK -- The compilation of artwork by Greg Olsen "Expressions of Faith" stayed at #1 on the LDS Bestsellers list while the new children's book "The First Vision" debuted at #3 on the list and "The Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley" remained at #2. This represents the first time that the nascent list has remained this stable from week to week. Meanwhile, the Mormon titles on the national bestseller lists are nothing but stable,with both "Nothing Like it in the World" and Stephen Covey's "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" remaining on the lists in about the same position. Also new on the LDS Bestsellers list is Deseret Book's recently released "GospeLink 2001 Demo Version" a $5 60-day trial to the computer resource and the compilation CD "Women of Destiny." However, with the LDS Church's General Conference approaching, the list may see significant changes over the next week as sales from conference weekend are reflected. Many LDS retailers, especially in Utah, organize special events at Conference time. The current titles on US National bestseller lists are: Nothing Like it in the World, by Stephen Ambrose A history of the building of the transcontinental railroad in the US. Ambrose, a highly regarded historian, details the involvement of Mormons in building crucial portions of the road, including the driving of the "golden spike" in the heart of Mormon territory. Currently on the following bestseller lists: This Last List 27 26 Barnes & Noble (Mar 29) Top 100 22 22 New York Times (Apr 1) Non-Fiction Hardcover [Independents - 10] The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, by Stephen R. Covey This ten-year-old personal management classic is still selling strongly. Currently on the following bestseller lists: This Last List 81 - Amazon.com (Mar 29) Top 100 18 18 Amazon.com (Mar 28) Non-Fiction Paperback 61 61 Barnes & Noble Top (Mar 29) Top 100 95 96 USA Today (Mar 29) 7 6 Wall Street Journal (Mar 23) Business Bestsellers in LDS Bookstores: This Last Title 1 1 Expressions of Faith by Greg Olsen Deseret Book 2 2 The Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley by Gordon B. Hinckley Deseret Book 3 - The First Vision by Cary Austin and Greg Newbold Deseret Book 4 7 Happiness: Finders, Keepers by Mary Ellen Edmunds Deseret Book 5 - GospeLink 2001 Demo Version Deseret Book 6 3 Mothers of the Prophets (Revised Edition) by Leonard J. Arrington and Susan Arrington Madsen Deseret Book 7 11 Between Husband & Wife: Gospel Perspectives on Marital Intimacy by Stephen E. Lamb & Douglas E Brinley Deseret Book 8 - The Miracle of Forgiveness by Spencer W. Kimball Deseret Book 9 5 A Quiet Heart by Patricia T. Holland Deseret Book 10 6 By Small & Simple Things: Recognizing Greatness Day to Day by Anita Canfield Deseret Book 11 - Women of Destiny (CD) Deseret Book 12 4 Peace: Music of Reflection (CD) Deseret Book 13 9 Beginning Reader Book of Mormon LDS Church Distribution 14 - Believing Christ: The Parable of the Bicycle and Other Good News by Stephen E. Robinson Deseret Book 15Tie - Here We Stand By Joseph Fielding McConkie Deseret Book 15Tie 12 Legacy (Video) LDS Church Distribution >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 - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 22:23:07 -0500 From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors I thought so too, until I started really thinking about some of the replies in this thread. Why would I want to know that information? One reason is just because I like to feel like I know the author of works that I like. I feel like I get to know them a little bit. However, another reason would be to judge their writing with that qualification in mind. "Well, he/she's inactive. Of course the opinions and views expressed aren't valid......" I would mentally make judgements before I read one word of the piece. I'm not sure that is a good thing. I'm not sure church attendance is the ultimate criteria of how worthy and faithful a person is. I think that there are as many people sitting in church, who in their minds and practices are as 'inactive' as many of those not attending. Does attending church make someone believing and worthy? And some one who truly has left the church, even with bitter feelings, may still have some valuable insight to share-either pertaining to reasons they left or just because they are a person living and breathing on God's green earth. I'm leaning toward the opinion that, for me, it is not necessary to know that much about the author. It is almost like making a judgement about the person to pin a label on them. There is such a continuum on the line between inactive and active, believing and not believing, worthy and not worthy. And it is not all based on where your body is on Sunday mornings. Tracie - -----Original Message----- I'm sorry, but I kind of agree with Benson. If they used to be Mormon, and are messing around with Mormon themes, that is an entirely different kind of thing from us "Mormon" Mormons who are trying to write to an audience of faith. Entirely different. In fact, downright amazingly different. Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 20:20:02 +0000 From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] B.J. ROWLEY, _My Body Fell Off!_ (Review) Thanks, Jonathan, for these good words. You said it much better than I could. Incidentally, Thom, and others on this list, have met me in person, so they know that I simply couldn't ever have an "out of body" experience. Too much body to go through.... At 01:58 PM 3/30/01 -0600, you wrote: >Not having read the book...still I think I have to stick up for Jeff >Needle's basic concern. First, though, a few caveats: - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 00:33:13 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Game_ (Review) [MOD: Michael's query on this point was the first of several I received. This is the only one I'm planning to post.] Margaret Young wrote: > I'm wondering how WOMEN felt about _Saints_ (which once had a Harlequin > Romance-type cover). I know some who were deeply offended by the obvious use of > Eliza R. Snow's history. Did they give any reasons for such an odd reaction? - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 00:45:07 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors I'm torn on which way I feel about it. On the one hand, I want to know what standing an author has. For one thing, I'm nosy. But a more relevant reason is, I strongly adhere to the unofficial definition of LDS literature as someone who is LDS--mind, body, and soul. I don't think former members or cultural members are the same thing. They're free to write and can write wonderful and valuable things, but I don't consider them true LDS authors. If we're going to talk about LDS literature, I want to know if it's really LDS. On the other hand, it does seem tacky to comment on one's religious standing in a literary medium. If we read in Irreantum one day that D. Michael Martindale has been a member in good standing right up until his disfellowshipment for sins of morality, I think just about everyone would feel uncomfortable. Yet that's only a difference of degree, not kind. I suppose a tolerable compromise would be to comment on the standing of an author if that author has commented on it publicly. If it's public knowledge by choice of the author, I don't see much harm in mentioning it. Perhaps the sting could be mitigated if direct quotes were used: "Jane Doe, self-described 'cultural Mormon,' yada-yada." - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 00:54:33 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Writing Schedules Brown wrote: > And now that we are bent over old "fuddie duddies," it's working > pretty well. I disagree with this characterization. You're not bent over. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:50:04 -0700 From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors (Compilation) On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 18:08:10 -0600, Jonathan Langford [MOD: Not me, but my compilation-ghost] wrote: >So where do you draw the line? Should a review of a play by Eric >Samuelsen say, "Inactive home teacher but current Temple Recommend >Holder Eric Samuelsen..." or a book by Scott Card "Democrat but >Clinton-hater Orson Scott Card..."=20 Why do you have to draw lines? No line adequately covers the wealth of differing situations the editors of Irreantum will likely meet. *Not* including certain general information is a disservice in a magazine that purports to serve the LDS writing community. I don't buy into the = currently en vogue idea that labels are inherently bad. Labels describe. As descriptions, they are very useful in conveying a lot of information in a short space. Why deal with "Inactive home teacher but current Temple Recommend holder" (and please read what Eric said carefully--according to his account, no bishop in the church would consider him an inactive home teacher--he just doesn't match the over-idealized home teacher described = in some, er, prominent church publications) when you can say simply "Mormon author" or "BYU theatre professor"? You don't have to be 100% accurate, = you just have to paint a broad picture and move on. We don't want to know = what someone was excommunicated for, or even that they were excommunicated, = but it *is* good to know that they are ex- or non-practicing, or head of = church education, or however else they choose to identify themselves. A person's relationship to the church is self-determined. Each one of us controls our relationship with the church and other members. Personally,= I like Jonathan's approach of letting the authors self-identify their = status only correcting in instances of misrepresentation. Personally, I've = found that most inactive members are happy to identify their inactive status. They wear it as a sort of badge of defiance. Which is just fine as far = as it goes. Others are just as convinced they are active and identify themselves as active and I'm okay with that as well. In my ward, I've gotten to know a couple of people who honestly consider themselves = active, participating LDS. This in spite of the fact that they attend church *maybe* once a month if they aren't doing anything else and they turn = down all callings. I'm happy to support them in their assertion. Their = activity or inactivity is between them and God. So I'm not going to judge their relationship with God or the church. But in PEC meeting, when it comes = up (and it does) and the bishop asks me how Brother so-and-so is doing, I'll explain that he considers himself active, but that he really isn't going = to do much that we ask him to--i.e. inactive. It's a label. It's a = judgement. But I hope that it is descriptive and not prescriptive. And if it is communicated properly, it will give the information I wish to convey = without me having to go into every detail of my visits with the members. Just as the short "non-practicing" gives me enough detail about an author to know generally what their relationship is with the church without having to describe all the gorey details about any past grievances that I'm *not* particularly interested in reading. >You say it plays a role in your perception of the artist. That is >precisely why I'm agin the idea. A friend refused to watch what I >consider the best version of the life of Christ ever made (Jesus of >Nazareth) because she had heard that the actor portraying Christ used >drugs in real life. "I'll never watch another movie starring Julie >Andrews," said another friend, "Not since she appeared naked in that >movie." =20 I don't know who your extreme friends are, Thom, but don't paint me with their stark brush. I don't want to ostracize someone based on their identification with the church--and I'll bet most people wouldn't either. The point of Irreantum is to spread knowledge of the LDS literary scene. = A part of that is to get to know the authors who are currently working with LDS literature. How can you possibly get to know an author in the LDS = scene without knowing how they stand with respects to the LDS part? Are they ashamed of their standing? Generally, I'd guess not. If they are struggling with their standing, that in itself lends a flavor to their = work as I gain the deeper understanding of where they are coming from. >At the same time, I'm not at all against an author's attitude about the >Church coming up in an interview where (hopefully) there is room to >mitigate any blanket statements ("Yes, I haven't been to Church in ten >years but I still support the Church in other ways...) A two-word >encapsulation of one's attitude about the Church ought be avoided, >however. I disagree. Why dwell on a huge story when a short two-word = encapsulation is all that is needed? Certainly if an author considers it important in = an interview, they should feel perfectly free to go into it at length, but = if they don't, then a simple description is useful and adequate. Why make = all these rules about what you can and can't ask? Why declare an author's relationship to the church off-limits? I want to get to know the people involved in LDS literature, and I am grateful for Irreantum's sincere efforts to convey the information as concisely as needed. I don't want = to hamper them in that effort by declaring certain labels off limits or = throw up proscriptive regulations on what they can or cannot report. Jacob Proffitt - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 15:13:10 -0700 From: LuAnnStaheli Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Game_ (Review) Card just spoke yesterday at the Children's Literature conference at UVSC and he did plenty of book signings, including one I had there ; ) He described Science Fiction the literature of childhood. I'mm have to get my notes and type his direct quote since we recently discussed this issue on this list. Lu Ann - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 15:15:18 -0700 From: LuAnnStaheli Subject: Re: [AML] _Anne Frank_ Performance Marilyn, Do you have parking at the Little Brown Theater other than on Springville Main Street? Lu Ann - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 03:38:11 -0800 From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors (Compilation) At 06:08 PM 3/30/01 -0600, you wrote: >From: Margaret Young > >Actually, if the writers would agree, we could invent an orthodoxy ranking >which >could follow each of the author's contributions, rather than the traditional >bio. It would be much more interesting than knowing how many children said >author has, or whether or not their pets are spayed. I think the issues Eric >raised comprise a good list. Author swears: a) Never b) occasionally c) >whenever the occasion justifies a good expletive Whenever Windows crashes (i.e., almost continuously). >----------------------------------------------------------- > >From: Thom Duncan > >Jonathan Langford wrote: > > > > Similarly, I think it would enhance the coverage of Marion Smith's novel > > _Riptide_ to know whether she is Mormon or not, and how she identifies > > herself in that regard. > >I would have appreciated something saying that Marion Smith was a woman >because I know a man of the same spelling. Why shouldn't Irreantum also >mention that? Shouldn't people also want to know the sex of a person? In this particular case, it would have been helpful to say something like "Marion Smith (NOT the BYU professor that everyone on the list knows)" . . . [snip] >I would still not use it, unless it was absolutely important to the >story. For example: "Former-Mormon Deborah Lakke tells about her life >as a Mormon in _Secret Ceremonies_. She's writing an expose of sorts, >and it makes sense to refer to her that way. But what if she wrote a >book of poetry. Do we refer to Carol Lynn Pearson as "Former wife of a >gay man who still hasn't married and she's 55 Carol Lynn Pearson ..." Or (an example from a discussion on another list) "41-year-old LDS never-married virgin Utah porn czar" >----------------------------------------------------------- > >From: "Jim Cobabe" > > >After reviewing a recent issue of Consumer Reports, I'd like to offer a >proposal toward a convenient standardized method for representing Church >status. > >In Consumer Reports, products are rated by indicating relative performance >in a particular category with a small circle. For good performers, the >circle is colored in. For less-than-satisfactory, the circle is less filled >in, in increments corresponding to the degree of dissatisfaction or defect. > >A similar approach could be easily adapted to the task of informing readers >about an author's standing in the Church. Based on whose rankings? The author's self-ranking? A survey of a group of his/her family members, friends, and acquaintances? An official report from his/her bishop? - -- Ronn! :) - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 09:11:39 -0500 From: "Screaming Todd" Subject: [AML] RE: Question for Irreantum's Editors I recognize that some might think of these activity tags as offensive, but let me give you all a real time example of how the problem can go wrong in the other direction. People often assume that once a person claims LDS status that they remain that way. An essay I am editing right now for Irreantum describes a writer as Brother [Blank]. "Brother" [Blank] would not want that at all. How do I know? He has asked to have his name removed from church records, that's how. Even if we don't state things in outright explicit terms, there is a tacit understanding that the material we have in Irreantum deals with Mormons and is usually written by Mormons. I know the editorship has tried to take the position of by, for, and about Mormons, but we're basically dealing with the by and for parts of the deal. This list focuses on LDS writers not on writers like Wallace Stegner, Rick Bass, Ron Carlson, Peter Rock, and Cormac McCarthy who make mention of Mormons or Mormon Country yet are not Mormon. We don't even really talk about Kirn, just Card and Hughes and the like. What about the Phyllis Barbers of the world or the Sterling McMurrins or the David Velozes or the Tim Lius or the Brady Udalls? What do we do to people when we assume a general level of activity in the church, when we make those assumptions about their work (Why would a good LDS boy write something like Natural Born Killers?) The reason: they're not necessarily "good Mormons" and its wrong to even suggest that they are. For example, Veloz has called himself "the dazed former Mormon lying on the floor after getting bawled out by Oliver Stone." On the other side of things, why do we ignore the Lance Larsens or the Darrell Spencers (the latter gets mentioned on the list, but his work isn't really discussed with much depth)? These last two are "practicing" as far as I know, but they don't really write about Mormons. Larsen, I know, tries not to. Another example: Eldridge Cleaver was a member, for a while. But I have heard people claim that he joined and took up the cause. I have looked into this and he was a member for a short while then lapsed, so it's not really okay to suggest that the gopsel redesigned "the" Black Panther--and people make that claim all the time. I side with my fellow editors who suggest that we make statements of activity when the authors themselves have tried to make public statements on the matter. Otherwise we ought to leave anything out that might make people think something that is not true (i.e. the aforementioned Brother [Blank]). We're not talking about literature on this list and in Irreantum, we're talking about literature in a context, and that context is Mormonism. If a given writer were a Nazi, we'd want to know the level at which they practiced Naziism, right? It would affect how we take their work (e.g. Leni Riffenstahl, Paul de Man, etc.). Why do we assume that it is improper to want to know the degree to which someone is involved in goodness? - -- Todd Robert Petersen - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 16:01:06 -0400 From: Merlyn J Clarke Subject: [AML] Eugene England Update >X-Originating-IP: [161.28.61.26] >From: "MARK ENGLAND" > >Just a quick note to everyone. Dad is home from rehab but going in daily for >therapy and radiation treatment. We need to get rid of the dog and two cats >that mom is allergic to and can be dangerous for dad when walking. Does >anyone know of a good home for them? The dog is a golden retriever, two >years old, very affectionate and gentle, had some training but not >consistantly. The two cats are beautiful siamese twins, also extremely >affectionate and curious. They tend to follow you around so they make good >companions. >Contact us if you know of a good home for them. >Thanks >Mark England - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 03:13:17 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] Michael RITCHEY, _Disoriented_ (Review) DISORIENTED by Michael Ritchey 1999 Cornerstone Publishing Hardcover, 280 pages $18.95 reviewed by Natalie Martindale, 14-year-old daughter of D. Michael In the book _Disoriented_, Michael Ritchey tells the story of two strangers who have a mysterious connection between each other. They are Ryan and Tara. They first meet in Dallas in an elevator and from then on are strongly attracted to each other. Both Ryan and Tara have secrets that are very important and very deadly. Ryan has discovered that matter has a kind of intelligence, and that if you confuse, or "disorient", that intelligence you can make it do anything you want it to do. That is information that could get Ryan into lots of trouble. Some people would do anything to find out how that process works. Even if they have to kill. Tara has been studying in the desert and has found something very extraordinary. There is a giant hole in the desert. When Tara tries to get close enough to examine it, first she feels frightened and unsure, then as she gets closer she feels a sense of euphoria. But then a step further, she feels gut-wrenching terror. She could go no further. The next day she goes back and finds that the "energy field" around the hole seems to be extending. Tara also sees a wild desert pig, called a javelina, head toward the hole. It seemed to feel the same emotions Tara went through. As it neared the hole, it started to stagger, but still went closer. Then it let out a blood-curdling squeal and convulsed wildly. Then it died. But even stranger, a few seconds later, the body of the javelina disintegrated. When Ryan and Tara meet, they feel an unusual sense of trust between them, even though they have never met before. They feel as though they would give up their lives for each other. But their romantic relationship would have to wait. Someone is after them. Someone who wants to kill them. The antagonist is a deranged psycho who is forever haunted by his abusive mothers memory. He thinks that he only has one purpose in life, to kill and to punish. But just because he's a psycho, doesn't mean that he is totally stupid. He can go places and get information without being seen. Throughout the whole book he is trying to kill Ryan and Tara. And with the help of his mamma, he just might actually do it. Ritchey portrays very realistic characters and emotions. One other thing I found very interesting was that Ritchey gave each character their own speaking time. We get to know the emotions and thoughts of each character and get many different points of views of one situation. Ritchey is an LDS author and gives you his interpretation of paradise and how the spirit world works. There is a lot of confrontation between good and evil throughout the book. You get a taste of both. Ryan, as you will see, has a very incredible experience with the spirit world and learns of his and Tara's importance in figuring out the mystery of "disorientation" before the bad guys do. Will Ryan and Tara figure out what to do in time? Will they escape the evil that is constantly staking them out? Will they ever be able to get on with their new found relationship? So many questions, with many more to come. All that can be answered when you read _Disoriented_. Get ready for adventure, romance, suspense, and mystery. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:13:53 -0600 From: "Brown" Subject: [AML] Hi Levi (was: Question for Irreantum's Editors) We heard from Levi Peterson! I was so excited to hear from Levi, as he is a favorite person! Hi, Levi! Are you in Oregon now? Or Washington? (Somewhere?) We missed you at our last meeting, and so we just want to say "hail" and "hi" and a bunch of other fun things to our great "backslider." Cheers! Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:20:16 -0600 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Ender's Game_ (Review) I was so glad to see Scott and Christine on the street in front of READ LEAF! (On the street means he's standing, not prone in bum condition) And he has a goatee. He's a lot thinner than I have ever seen him, and I think he's also grown an inch or two? Anyway, it was very good to see him after 26 years, and now I hope that Michael Martindale will get him to the writer's conference, because if you don't, Michael, I will ask him to the March meeting. I have already asked Doug Stewart, the author of Saturday's Warrior, and he said he'd come! And I'm very excited. Maybe people of AML ilk may look askance at Saturday's Warrior, but I feel it's one of the FIRST truly MORMON AUDIENCE pieces, (and our theme is Mormon Writers and their audiences, etc.) and now it's a classic. That's why I am EAGER to hear him. And he promised to give us some live or video taste! And he's writing a new one for Broadway, which is the "walking the tightrope" thing! Marilyn - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:46:33 -0600 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] _Anne Frank_ Performance I have seen both "Anne Frank"s now and the verdict is out--they are both SUPERB! There is not a better one in the bunch, and the supporting cast (the sisters and the boys are the right ages also) is fantastic. Sharlee is right. Something is achieved by using the young people who are the actual ages--something that is lost in other productions. This really is a marvelous effort, and one definitely worth bringing your young people to see! Marilyn Brown - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:51:09 -0600 From: "Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: _Anne Frank_ (Performance) Thanks, Sharlee. Bill received the award from AACT (Association for Community Theatres or something). They are based in Texas, I found out, not Denver. It was a complete surprise to him. He was excited. The award will hang in the Little Brown Theatre. Marilyn B. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 15:09:40 -0600 From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] RE: Question for Irreantum's Editors Honest answer to screaming Todd's final question--"Why shouldn't we want to know the degree to which someone is involved in goodness?" In all seriousness, one of our biggest problems in the Church is our tendency to judge others according to our personal standards of orthodoxy--even our image (almost always false) of what a "Good Mormon" does, how a "good Mormon" dresses, etc. I cannot support anything which encourages such a tendency. I guess in this particular area, I'm a formalist. Let the art stand on its own. I remember so well when Carol Lyn Pearson got divorced, how readily she was judged because she had chosen to write WHILE raising her family. The suggestion was overtly and frequently made that her fame had ended her marriage. In fact, as anyone who knows her or has read _Goodbye, I Love You_ knows, her fame did NOT end Carol's marriage. Her writing did not end it. But I heard the judgments so often. I've heard judgments casually passed on Levi Peterson, Brian Evenson, Dave Veloz, Julie Nichols, and Phyllis Barber. (And I probably HAVEN'T heard some passed on me, because I wasn't meant to hear that particular gossip.) My husband is SO careful about not telling me a thing relating to Church disciplinary counsels he has sat on, and I have seen him get very upset when some high counsellor has alluded to a CDC. I myself have been very upset when a Sunday School teacher proclaimed his orthodoxy by extolling a decision to excommunicate a particular member. (None of his business, and certainly nothing to be presented during a meeting which should unite rather than divide us.) Lavina Fielding Anderson has written beautifully about her experience with excommunication--how it made her realize how terribly judgmental she had been as an "orthodox" Mormon. It's an article I re-read periodically, and find inspiring. It forces me to ask myself if I'm actually living up to the mandate to NOT judge. I prefer a "don't ask; don't tell" policy in this area. Every artist is a child of God. What more do I really need to know than that? [Margaret Young] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 15:55:50 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors Screaming Todd wrote: > >> If a > given writer were a Nazi, we'd want to know the level at which they > practiced Naziism, right? I wouldn't want to know unless the writer was writing authoritatively about Nazism. If he were writing a short story about Patty's Pink Party dress, I wouldn't care. If the story has Patty being raped by a Jew and then Johnny comes in and kills the Jews and then rejoices in it, how am I served in any way by knowing that the writer is a racist? I'm still affected emotionally by the story. > It would affect how we take their work (e.g. Leni > Riffenstahl, Paul de Man, etc.). Why do we assume that it is improper to > want to know the degree to which someone is involved in goodness? It is improper because it is part of the natural man to think that a person who isn't "good" (read: "good like they are") can't possibly be writing anything of worth. We read the critique of the Church that Nibley writes and we laud it, because he's inactive. D. Michael Quinn makes a similar critique and we dismiss it because he's been excommunicated. Labels can adversely affect how we read a story, or a play, or a film. Because it is our nature to focus more on the person than on the work of art. Labels tell us implicitly that good Mormons can't to good art (at least not the art that President Kimball's vision talks about), while good Mormons can. Labeling is an ugly, ugly practice. - -- Thom Duncan Playwrights Circle an organization of professionals - -------------------------- Shameless Plug - ------------------------------- Don't miss the Playwrights Circle Summer Festival at UVSC! *J. Golden* - a one-man play by James Arrington, starring Marvin Payne *SFX5* - 5 original short science fiction plays *Peculiarities* - a new full-length play by Eric Samuelsen For more information about the Playwrights Circle and our summer festival: http://www.playwrightscircle.com - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 16:00:38 -0600 From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Anne Frank_ Performance > Marilyn, > Do you have parking at the Little Brown Theater other than on > Springville Main > Street? > Lu Ann Is it okay if I answer this even though I'm not Marilyn and not even close? But I don't see an answer from her so she might have missed it. Yes, we have parking at the Little Brown other than on the street. There's a parking lot behind the building that you access either through an alley on the south side of the martial arts place next door to the Little Brown, or around the north end of the block behind the furniture store. If you come in that way (you'll be coming in through one of the rehearsal spaces) please make sure and come up front and get a ticket. Otherwise Marilyn will probably box my ears. ;-) - -- Scott Tarbet - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 16:01:57 -0600 From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: [AML] CARD, _Saints_ (was: _Ender's Game_)) Did they give any reasons for such an odd reaction? I disliked _Saints_ because it seemed a platitudinous rehash of standard polygamous justification (boy do I sound mad or what????). Cathy (Gileadi) Wilson Editing Etc. 1400 West 2060 North Helper UT 84526 - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 16:05:31 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Question for Irreantum's Editors ROY SCHMIDT wrote: > > Well, some once referred to Mike Quinn as "former Mormon intellectual, > Michael Quinn." I preferred the way that KUED referred to him in their documentary on Brigham Young. "D Michael Quinn, Historian." No reference at all to his current or past status. - -- Thom Duncan Playwrights Circle an organization of professionals - -------------------------- Shameless Plug - ------------------------------- Don't miss the Playwrights Circle Summer Festival at UVSC! *J. Golden* - a one-man play by James Arrington, starring Marvin Payne *SFX5* - 5 original short science fiction plays *Peculiarities* - a new full-length play by Eric Samuelsen For more information about the Playwrights Circle and our summer festival: http://www.playwrightscircle.com - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - 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 #292 ******************************