From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #619 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 Wednesday, February 20 2002 Volume 01 : Number 619 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 16:53:41 -0500 From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes margaret young wrote: > I'm not > really sure how a discussion of Caliban would appropriately lead into a > discussion of race, but I'd be interested to see a lecture that made that > leap. I'm only guessing here because it wasn't my lecture and I wasn't there, but I can see a potential route for the thematic leap. Some scholars have written that Caliban is an acronym for Canibal, and have researched contemporary accounts of English explorers to the West Indies that refer to all the natives there as canibals. These scholars have theorized that The Tempest is somewhat allegorical of the European colonization of the New World. Caliban was a native of the island and enslaved. And talk about a guilt trip re: The Tempest--when I was doing graduate work at the University of Utah I wrote a paper on the allegorical nature of the Tempest. I was drawn to the play in a sort of prompting way. I'd exhausted the scholarship on it and felt that the learned men and women were somehow missing the point. So I fasted and pondered and one late, late night I read the entire play at one sitting. It was the oddest sensation. Like I had all the pieces of a jigsaw tossed up into the air and they came down in one perfect piece, joined. Mostly it was like the spirit of Shakespeare jumped inside my brain and made all the connections of the play for me--linking it to all kinds of uniquely Latter-day thinking. So, leaving out the fasting and meditation and all the odd sensations, I wrote up my purely allegorical reading of the play and proudly turned it in. Did I mention this was the University of Utah? The professor called me into his office and blasted me right and left and told me my presence in his classroom was an insult. More than that he failed me exclusively on the basis of my paper. This is the one time in my life I've appealed a grade. Bless you Norman Council (Dean of Humanities) who slapped the professor resoundingly down. Tony Markham - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 15:15:07 -0700 From: rwilliams Subject: RE: [AML] Edward SAID, _Orientalism_ >Not meaning to be snippy, I'd suggest that you might more profitably have read >Ruth Benedict before going to China than Said after getting there. Whatever >points Said makes about creating a "dualistic dichotomy" and choosing evidence >to satisfy it, Benedict and Boas made them with less ideological baggage and >more grace decades earlier. There were a _lot_ of things I would have liked to read before I left, but, as I said, the decision to leave was rather sudden. I'm not familiar with Ruth Benedict's work, and so have no idea how to compare her to Said. I promise to read it for myself. But, even assuming that you are right in saying that Benedict's work does the same thing as Said's but without all the "ideological baggage," my point was not that Said is the _best_ at critiquing close-minded essentialism, only that he does it without being a racist. >The fact is, your reading of the book is >informed by the lenses you wear, just as my reading is informed by mine. I couldn't agree more. That's why I told the whole China story. >Your statement suggests (strongly) that there's one correct reading of the book, and >that it isn't mine. I beg to differ. My reading is a reasonable one, if not >uniquely so. I wouldn't say "one correct reading," but rather another, more sympathetic reading. >The "hence" is the logical conclusion that I draw from Said's words. If you tell me A, B, >and C, and if they logically lead to D, then even if you specifically >deny that you ever intended D, I'm justified in saying "hence, D." My logical >faculties are quite good, and I stand by my "hence." Here I think you are implying that even if Said didn't intend to be a racist, he still is. This is definitely possible. If Said had said something like "people with white skin cannot, ever, under any conditions understand Islam, but I am not a racist!" then, yes, I would agree with you 100%: he is a racist, even if he claims he is not. However, as I read it, the problem Said points to in the discourse of Orientalism is not a genetic one, but a _cognitive_ one (that is, extragenetic), and is therefore subject to change--just as I changed after I arrived in China. That's what I find so valuable in Said. He isn't saying, "Westerners (because of blood or skin or whatever) are forever doomed to produce essentialist discourse," but rather, "Westerners need to watch out they don't allow their own inherited culture to perpetuate certain stereotypes about the 'other' culture." Thus, he is a "culturalist," maybe, but not a "racist," and there is a big difference. The former allows for (even calls for) change, the latter proscribes it. Granted, if you can find somewhere in the book where Said says that skin color, blood-type, bone size, muscle-tone, or any other genetic feature actually dictates how one perceives the Orient, then I will gladly relocate Said to my shelf of shame. Until then, we will perhaps have to agree to disagree. And while I don't foresee an agreement with Jim on this issue, I will say that I have enjoyed this discussion, and will definitely read the texts he recommends (the Berlin and the Benedict). - --John Williams UC Irvine. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 15:35:58 -0700 From: "Ethan Skarstedt" Subject: RE: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes Margaret said: "I'm not really sure how a discussion of Caliban would appropriately lead into a discussion of race,..." Exactly my objection. It didn't. We left the textual Caliban entirely and instead leapt off on a tangent starting from his imagined status as an oppressed minority. Margaret said:=20 "I don't think I would lead a discussion of _The Tempest_ into a classroom testimony against racism, but I think we need a few of those cathartic experiences where we truly recognize where we are, where we've been, and what our Christian responsibility is towards our brothers and sisters. " Certainly. I couldn't agree more that such cathartic experiences are valuable, even necessary, in a person's life. However, I don't think that a literature class is the right place to be leading cathartic experiences, especially not at the expense of the subject material. Not only is it not what the students are paying for, not only is it not what they expect when they sign up for the class, but the setting implies that the professor is somehow qualified to lead a cathartic experience. In my experience most literature professors are no more qualified to lead a cathartic experience than their students are. Students attend class to gain from the professor's knowledge of the subject material, not be indoctrinated in the professor's political/social/philosophical opinions. To relate this to the Caliban experience, I would have had no objection if the professor had us read papers exploring race issues inherent in Shakespeare's Caliban and then led a discussion on the matter. That would, IMO have been a perfectly valid choice between hundreds of angles from which to look at Caliban. You certainly can't look at all the angles in the time allotted. It's not what happened though. Todd Peterson said: "To set the agenda that one will have no agenda in a literature course is really just business as usual politics, defending the status quo. For nearly 100 years no one seriously looked at the writing of people who weren't white and male. That's the great tragedy." It is a tragedy. However, the way to avoid "...business as usual politics, defending the status quo" in the classroom, is not to pick a different political stance and teach that exclusively instead, but to teach many viewpoints, striving to plumb the full range and then encourage students to find their own balance. My getting blasted nearly exclusively with black literature in that Post 1960s American novel class was just as bad as if I had been blasted nearly exclusively with middle class white literature or blasted exclusively with anything for that matter. A professor should not look at him/her self (Gosh I wish English had a neuter pronoun.) as an ideological monitor but rather as a guide to the many facets of that particular corner of the world of knowledge they are expert in. "It's understandable that white males would feel badly about a reversal, but it's a chance for us to feel how the other half lived (without the physical, emotional, and economic persecution). Maybe it's that walking a mile in someone else's shoes that LDS people need. And I'm serious about that." If the status quo is drastically unfair, leaning toward one thing over another, then EVERYONE should feel badly about a reversal, for a simple reversal means that the status quo is now drastically unfair and leaning toward one thing over another, just in another direction. It was attempts of this kind to simply reverse the status quo that I found so objectionable and shortsighted in my lit classes. I hasten to agree though, that a healthy dose of walking in other folk's shoes is a good thing, just not an overdose. "I say read the classics on your own and let the teachers throw you all something you might not have thought to pick up on your own. Lord help us all if we only read what's been assigned." Amen. But must all those things that "we all" would not have thought to pick up on our own be reflective of only the professor's own viewpoint? And should a professor teaching a survey class feel free to ignore all but one facet of the field that the class is to cover? I don't think so.=20 - -Ethan Skarstedt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 15:41:04 -0700 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes - ---Original Message From: Todd Petersen > It's understandable that white males would feel badly about a > reversal, but it's a chance for us to feel how the other half > lived (without the physical, emotional, and economic > pursecution). Maybe it's that walking a mile in someone > else's shoes that LDS people need. And I'm serious about that. I don't mind the reversal, per se, but by ignoring *all* the white guys, you ignore a lot of quality literature. Of course, that's the real problem--determining quality. Personally, I'm enough of an idealist that I like the idea of a meritocracy. I would like to read things that are of value--regardless of the author's skin. To me, it comes down to the reason you include an author/book on a reading list. An author being dark skinned doesn't seem like a very justifiable reason to me for inclusion (unless the list is stated as "dark skinned literature"). A course that purports to be "American Literature Since the 1960s" that is weighted 80% African-American doesn't pass the smell-test to me. For one, African-Americans represent less than 30% of the U.S. population. For another, they represent even less of the *writing* population. I find it unlikely that one race is so gifted that they constitute such a skewed ratio of good writers. > As HUCKLEBERRY FINN and AMERICAN HISTORY X show us, the only > way to overcome racism is by being in those shoes for a while. I don't buy this at all. You seem to be saying that I can only not be racist if I am able to walk in the shoes of other races. That doesn't make sense--unless your assumption is that everybody is essentially incurably racist. Even if you don't give any credence to Derrida's (sp?) concept of the unapproachable (or at least very distant) "other", you still have some gulfs that would take some work to overcome. Multiply that by how many different races/cultures there are on the planet and you have way more than a life-time of work if you intend to earn the title of non-racist. Similar to my affection with meritocracy, I much prefer trying to observe people as individuals and take them as they wish to present themselves to me (in action and word). I try to understand the perspective of the oppressed and persecuted. I try to love all my fellow-men(/women). I try to serve with honesty and diligence. If that isn't enough to overcome racism, then I suppose I'll just have to get used to being a racist. Being a white guy, I'll be called racist anyway, regardless of what I do--at least as things currently stand. > I say read the classics on your own and let the teachers > throw you all something you might not have thought to pick up > on your own. Lord help us all if we only read what's been assigned. But the point of college courses isn't just the solitary act of reading a work of literature. The point includes the opportunity to discuss, analyze, and be critiqued in your analysis of those works. If you don't partake of the very best that literature has to offer, then your experience will be severely limited. I wouldn't have gained near as much as I did from my English degree if I hadn't had a class on Shakespeare, for example. Ditto John Donne and T.S. Elliot. I don't mind finding things of good repute and praiseworthy wherever they may be found, but I don't like the too-common agenda in some liberal arts departments/courses/instructors of dismissing white guys in favor of other skin-tones. I'll always treasure my experience with Leslie Silko, but don't tell me that she is all there is to American Lit. I enjoyed "Hundred Years of Solitude", but would resent its use to take away "King Lear". There *is* room for discussions of who should be included in different courses, but criteria other than skin-color should be used in evaluating literature curriculum (with the obvious exception of courses about specific cultures, etc.). Maybe this is something that can be attributed to the difference between teacher and student. A college professor teaches the same course over and over and becomes *very* familiar with the course curriculum over time. To them, an exploration of alternative literature may be very interesting and intriguing. But doing so neglects the fact that for many of their students, this is the only opportunity they will have to study and discuss those authors/works that are so old-hat and thus easily dismissed by the professionals. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 17:44:28 EST From: Turk325@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Meter in Poetry In a message dated 2/19/02 2:45:15 PM, bobernice@hotmail.com writes: << Mary Oliver, who is an award winning poet but does not write with meter o= r=20 rhyme,=20 nevertheless understands the importance of meter and rhyme. She wrote in her= =20 book _Rules for the Dance_ that =E2=80=9CStudents and other readers of Milton, of Shakespeare, of Wordsworth= , of=20 Wilfred Owens, even of Frost, come to the poems, frankly, with tin ears. >> Does she really say "Wilfred Owen*s*"? Kurt Weiland=20 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 16:05:40 -0700 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Cultural Imperialism - ---Original Message From: Todd Petersen > CULTURE AND EMPIRE is better anyway. But somehow students, > particularly LDS ones, need to be made aware of cultural > imperialism in all its forms, since our church and its > "standards" are as imperialist as anything else in this > world, maybe more so. > > We want to turn the world into suburban Utah, and that is its > own problem, one that has nothing to do with our Savior, or > maybe everything. > > Anything that could help an LDS person understand what it > means to be a cultural imperialist is a good thing, in my opinion. I need to ask what you mean by Cultural Imperialism here. It's a term I don't understand, though it is used a lot lately. To me, Imperialism means force. Which makes me wonder how a culture can be Imperialist unless it wields a military to force its will on others. The British Empire at its height is my image of Imperialism. Which leads me to wonder how we Mormons are now targets for being Imperialist? We have no military and don't have any power to force anybody to do anything (even if our theology allowed compulsion). As I see it, we have a culture (however hard it is to define) and we discuss our culture with others in the "marketplace of ideas". If somebody else adopts aspects of my culture, then I assume that they do so of their own free will because they like what they see and choose to abandon their current way of doing things in favor of my own. What I don't understand is how Cultural Imperialism enters the picture in such an exchange. Or is Cultural Imperialism something else entirely and I've misunderstood? Cultures interact in strange ways in our world, particularly as things are brought together in new combinations through modern communications media. I guess what I'm asking is if there is a way of looking at those interactions that I am missing? Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 23:12:11 GMT From: cgileadi@emerytelcom.net Subject: Re: [AML] Meter in Poetry > > > I don’t know what they are teaching at the Y, but a good understanding of > rhyme and meter can only help in reading and writing poetry, regardless of > whether you eventually write that way or with your own style. Whenever I get the chance to teach poetry, I always ask the students to play with meters and rhyme, even if it's only an exercise. Most of the time, we keep it playful (although we try to keep it accurate too) so they don't lose a sense of the fun of poetry. And most of the time, the students have a good time with it. I only had one man in a community writing class leave and never return, because he felt that his personal style of free verse was somehow insulted. I certainly never mean to do that! Cathy Wilson - --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:01:34 -0600 From: Jonathan Langford Subject: RE: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes Todd wrote: >I say read the classics on your own and let the teachers throw you all >something you might not have thought to pick up on your own. Lord help >us all if we only read what's been assigned. I'm hesitant to accept this view because I'm all too aware how few of us *do* read anything beyond what's been assigned. Generally speaking, the purpose of a "core" reading--the assigned reading list, in other words--is considered to be that it focuses in on that which everyone should be able to assume we all have an acquaintance with, if we have completed [fill in the blank] type of academic or professional training. I think we run a very real risk, when we exclude certain works because "everyone should know that already," of guaranteeing that many students never will be exposed to those works. Even if they read them on their own, it will be without the benefit of whatever insight and knowledge a teacher can bring to bear on the work in question. Todd also wrote: >It's understandable that white males would feel badly about a reversal, >but it's a chance for us to feel how the other half lived (without the >physical, emotional, and economic pursecution). Maybe it's that walking >a mile in someone else's shoes that LDS people need. And I'm serious >about that. I'm afraid this makes me wince, for several reasons. First, I think it's an excellent way of guaranteeing that a large segment of those who experience English classes will wind up hostile to the profession of English. Second, it seems to make the justification for teaching specific texts on purely moral and political grounds. Granted that there is no such thing as a nonpolitical ground; still, if it comes down to nothing but politics, what makes our politics as English professors worthy of privileging as part of the university curriculum? If the answer is nothing more than "This is the arena where we have power, and so we'll exercise it to meet the political goals we approve of," I don't think I'm comfortable with that. In other words: What justifies us, as English professors, *besides* our politics--and what implications does the answer have for what we should be teaching? Third, I'm not convinced it's a good idea to use historical and societal inequities as justifications for practices within the microcosm of the classroom. The classroom is a venue of power, and as such is just as prone to abuse as any other. I think there's something questionable, and prone to abuse, in professors justifying their exercise of power over students in terms of identification with an oppressed class. Among other things, it has the potential to recast student challenges of professors' opinions as an act against the oppressed class. This may sound farfetched, but I think I've seen it happening on more than one occasion. I'm aware that I'm overreading Todd's response here, going in a number of directions I'm sure he hadn't intended. But I think it's important to look carefully at this question of what justifications we provide for what we do in the classroom. Jonathan Langford Speaking for myself, not AML-List jlangfor@pressenter.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 19:01:29 -0700 From: Lynette Jones Subject: [AML] Joseph Smith As a Character Well, I've read Sarah and Rebecca. I must say, Rebecca is a great improvement over Sarah. I've also read Drigger three times and am ready to answer the question why I think there are things that could have been done differently. However, I must say here, Rob, that I think Digger is well written and full of good insight. I would not replace it. I would keep it as it is and write a new piece. Digger is a strong statement of all that Mormon culture was struggling with in the 1980's. It is time to leave those issues and dig a little deeper to the simpler one's that resonate through the ages. I've written six pages of thoughts, but I think I do better when I am asked questions. Lynette Jones - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 19:02:23 -0800 (PST) From: Colin Douglas Subject: Re: [AML] Meter in Poetry (was: Agendas in Lit Classes) I recommend an all-but-forgotten book that you'll have to find in a= library, How Does a Poem Mean?, by John Ciardi.---C. Douglas - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 21:23:36 -0700 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes - ---Original Message From: margaret young > [MOD: I'd like to broaden the topic as well, to include anyone > who--for any > reason, not just race--felt he/she had been "guilted" or > otherwise subjected > to a particular agenda in literature classes, either at BYU > or anywhere > else--and how that did or didn't affect your approach to literature, > including Mormon literature. My experience as an English major at BYU is fading fast in my memory. Right now, I can't think of any "guilting" in my classes. I had one teacher who was an avid feminist (*not* Cecelia Farr), but since the course was Victorian Women's Literature, it played out just fine. In that class, I didn't feel antagonized at all, even though I am something of an outspoken guy (no, really! I know you may find that hard to believe ;). Frankly, it was fascinating. My professors ran the gamut from the old staid guy who wanted everything just *so* (and who gave me an A- on a John Donne formal analysis essay that I wrote entirely in dialogue--I am *so* proud of that achievement) to a very proper young lady who typified old-school formality to experienced and interested professors who brought Shakespeare alive without having to resort to Kenneth Brannaugh. I had a couple of experiences with agendized *students* who would dominate the occasional discussion but, well, I've never been reluctant to express my opinions in the face of opposition. I share some pride (um, good pride?) that we kept those discussions more intense than heated and in the end they were beneficial to me and I hope the others in class. Of course, that's my side. For all I know, I was yet another overbearing male oppressor to them (which I would certainly regret). I *do* remember that my strongly conservative/libertarian view-point was more often than not a minority opinion in my class discussions (though hardly in the wider campus). But I never suffered for my opinions (that I am aware of), however unpopular they might have been with classmates. I thought my professors were uniformly professional, open to discussions, analytical, helpful, and willing to share their knowledge and insights. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 09:33:46 -0700 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] Hancock County Tickets My wife says we have two extra tickets to this Tim Slover play at BYU tonight. If you want to go, contact me before 5:00 at chris.bigelow@unicitynetwork.com. You would meet us in the HFAC to receive your tickets (right by whichever door to the Pardoe Theatre is section 1). (We don't care about payment for them.) [MOD: Please contact Chris *directly* rather than using the "Reply" feature if you have an interest in this. Thanks!] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 19:59:44 -0600 From: "Kumiko" Subject: [AML] LDS Box Office Report Feb. 8 Feature Films by LDS/Mormon Filmmakers and Actors - - Preston Hunter Weekend Box Office Report (U.S. Domestic Box Office Gross) Weekend of February 8, 2002 "The Singles Ward," the cameo-filled comedy directed by Kurt Hale, was going strong in its second week, a box office take bringing its total to over $100,000 -- not bad for a movie that cost only about $425,000 to make. (This week's box office for "The Singles Ward" did not show up at the-numbers.com - -- something that sometimes happes with independent films -- but sources inside the production company cite the total box office as over $100,000.) After two months in release the hit film "Ocean's Eleven" has finally dropped out of the top 20 -- at number 21 nationwide. It will probably be a long time before another movie with Mormon characters dominates the box office the way this one did. ACADEMY AWARD NOMINATIONS: LDS genre films were virtually shut out of the Oscar nominations this year, with no nominations going to "Brigham City" or "The Other Side of Heaven." Were Russell Crowe, Sean Penn, Will Smith, Denzel Washington, and Tom Wilkinson really better than Richard Dutcher in "Brigham City," or did Academy voters simply not see that movie? You be the judge. We're not aware of any Latter-day Saints who received Oscar nominations this year, although many nominated films had Latter-day Saints in key positions. John Garbett (of "Other Side of Heaven" fame) was the early producer of "Shrek," which was nominated for Best Animated Feature Film and also for Best Screenplay (Adaptation). "Monsters, Inc." (from Pixar) was nominated for Best Animated Feature Film, Best Musical Score, Best Song, and Best Sound Editing. "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" (which was inspired in part by Latter-day Saint writer Chris Conkling's 1978 version of Tolkien's classic fantasy novel) was nominated for 13 Academy Awards. Although "Mulholland Drive" (co-written and co-produced by Joyce Eliason) received numerous nominations at the Golden Globes and in major critics awards lists, it made hardly a ripple in Academy Award nominations. It was only nominated for a Best Director award for David Lynch. One tenuous but fun connection: Actor Denzel Washington was nominated for an Academy Award for his role as an urban cop in "Training Day," in which he asks his new rookie partner (Ethan Hawke) why he won't use drugs, saying "Why not? You a Mormon?" (For the record, neither Denzel nor Ethan are Mormons.) LOOKING AHEAD: LDS Genre: The producers of the "Charly" movie have changed the title from "Charly, Forever" to "Jack Weyland's Charly." No word on when the movie will be released. Kels Goodman has wrapped up filming of the winter scenes for his upcoming epic "Handcart." An extensive array of photos of the cast, crew, and production can be found at http://www.kelsgoodman.com Upcoming Hollywood movies with Mormon/LDS stars: The release date of "The New Guy" (starring Eliza Dushku) has been pushed back from February to May. You can still look for "Murder by Numbers" (starring Ryan Gosling and non-LDS actress Sandra Bullock) to open on April 19th. [If table below doesn't line up properly, try looking at them with a mono-spaced font, such as courier - Ed.] Natl Film Title Weekend Gross Rank LDS/Mormon Filmmaker or Actor Total Gross Theaters Days - ---- ------------------------------ ------- ----- ---- 21 Ocean's Eleven $992,235 812 66 LDS characters: Malloy twins 180,535,266 32 Behind Enemy Lines 188,761 306 73 David Veloz (screenwriter) 58,084,217 39 Mulholland Drive 73,485 71 126 Joyce Eliason (producer/writer) 6,649,583 42 The Other Side of Heaven 49,369 31 59 Mitch Davis (writer/director) 1,386,677 John H. Groberg (author/character) Gerald Molen, John Garbett (producers) 44 The Singles Ward ~45,000 11 10 Kurt Hale (writer/director) ~100,000 John E. Moyer (writer) Dave Hunter (producer) Cody Hale (composer) Ryan Little (cinematographer) Actors: Will Swenson, Connie Young Daryn Tufts, Kirby Heyborne Michael Birkeland, Bob-O Swenson Lincoln Hoppe, Tarance Edwards Michelle Ainge, Gretchen Whalley Sedra Santos 55 Out Cold 15,979 45 82 A. J. Cook (female lead) 13,883,044 64 Galapagos 9,300 3 836 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 12,274,898 71 China: The Panda Adventure 6,763 7 199 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 1,914,205 76 Island of the Sharks 4,176 4 1018 Alan Williams (composer) 10,633,198 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:13:21 -0700 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: [AML] Alternative Press Report I printed and hand bound ten copies of J. Scott Bronson's "The Whipping = Boy" as an experiment. I wanted to see if it would be possible to = create a small run press that would publish the works of list members, = and then market the books back to the list--sort of a law of = consecration for writers thing. This is my report. It might work. The experiment started out well. It took me a while to typeset and lay = out (can those term be used if you're using a computor?). Anyway, I = divided the text into pages, then set the pages up on a sheet so they = would show the pages in order when folded in signatures. Printing it = took a day. Binding it should have only taken 1-3 weeks, but, and this = is the big obsticle I discovered, it took me a few months because I = don't have any free time. I also had a big break down that put = everything on hold. So it has taken much too long. For this idea to work I would have to have several titles availible in = fairly good quantities at once. The amount of work required, the time = constrants I have and unpredictable nature of my head (I think that's = where ptsd is stored) makes it kind of impossible for me. This idea = might work, but not with me at the helm. The next experiment will be to find out whether such books are = marketable. Say maybe with an as in Irreantum, a table at the AML = convention or with on-line sales. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 22:59:21 -0700 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes I don't have any regrets about getting my degree in English from BYU. I know there was a lot of tension in the department--I was there just as = the controversy over certain professors got very heated--but I always felt = that I had the opportunity to learn from people whose ideas and philosophies = were very wide-ranging. Of the few experiences I had where I ran up against some professor's political agenda, only one is relevant here. It was a literature survey course, English 293, and it covered American literature from the first colonists to some period in the 20th century. The course readings were = very broad; we had some traditional works and some obscure works, and I think = it was a very good combination. I chose that section of the course because = I'd taken classes from the professor before, and I liked her a lot. The problem was that this professor had very strong opinions about race, feminism, and the evils of Western civilization, and she made those = opinions a part of our class discussions. People who disagreed with her were shot down immediately and with a certain amount of sarcasm. There was no free exchange of ideas, in which we might have decided for ourselves what was right; she promoted her own point of view too heavily for that. The end result was that the half of the class who agreed with her had their = opinions reinforced; the half who disagreed saw the illogic of her straw man = tactics and were reinforced in *their* opinions. Nobody walked in anybody else's shoes for ten feet, let alone a mile. You're probably guessing which side I was part of based on the language = I've been using. Wrong. I was in the "agreed with her" camp. In truth, I didn't have much of an opinion of my own. I found it interesting to = argue both sides, but in the end I thought she was right. It wasn't until much later, after college, that I realized that she had never given us both = sides of any issue. To be fair, she'd come to all her conclusions through experience, study, and argument; what was wrong was that she didn't allow her students the same opportunities. All that time she'd made it seem really obvious what the "right" opinions were, when the truth was that = the issues weren't that clear at all. With its broad, nontraditional reading list, the course *should* have = been a great opportunity to reexamine the idea of canon, and to study some unfamiliar works of literature. But, to paraphrase what Jim Picht said = in another post, she gave us issues and then set the terms by which we could discuss them. It made for a very limited classroom experience. I'm = sorry for that. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 23:55:42 -0700 From: "Clark Draney" Subject: RE: [AML] Agendas in Lit Classes Ethan Skarstedt wrote: “You certainly can't look at all the angles in the time allotted.” and “I couldn't agree more that such cathartic experiences are valuable, even necessary, in a person's life. However, I don't think that a literature class is the right place to be leading cathartic experiences, especially not at the expense of the subject material.” I think I agree that Lit. classes should not be structured to be cathartic experiences for the class as a whole, but can’t we allow for the possibility that such experiences happen individually? That was certainly the case for me. Wilfred Samuel’s class at the University of Utah on James Baldwin and Toni Morrison was upsetting and discomfiting enough for me to cause me to reconsider many things I thought I truly believed about myself and my religion. I doubt very much that he set up the course that way, but the convergence of texts, class discussion and my own reading made it happen anyway. And what an experience it was! It shifted my entire career. Anyway, Ethan also said, “Students attend class to gain from the professor's knowledge of the subject material, not be indoctrinated in the professor's political/social/philosophical opinions.” Don’t you agree that we can hardly help teaching from a particular political/social/etc. stance? As much as we might like to imagine that we are objectively presenting Knowledge, we are, in fact, producing and reproducing ideologies. Isn’t the key, however, to make sure students understand that it IS a stance among many and leave the door wide open for them to disagree (and even encourage them to challenge our views)? The resulting “conversation” (what has been called the “conversation of mankind” (Bruffee and those preceding him)) is the core of teaching in the humanities. So, Ethan, when you say, “the way to avoid "...business as usual politics, defending the status quo" in the classroom, is not to pick a different political stance and teach that exclusively instead, but to teach many viewpoints, striving to plumb the full range and then encourage students to find their own balance” I find myself agreeing with you heartily. Clark D. - -------- Against the disease of writing one must take special precautions, for it is a dangerous and a contagious disease. --Peter Abelard _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #619 ******************************