From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #719 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 Tuesday, May 21 2002 Volume 01 : Number 719 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 03:02:31 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] LYON, _T. Edgar Lyon: A Teacher in Zion_ (Deseret News) Deseret News Sunday, May 19, 2002 Lyon offers candid look at his father By Dennis Lythgoe Deseret News staff writer T. EDGAR LYON: A TEACHER IN ZION; by T. Edgar Lyon Jr., BYU Press, 346 pages, $28.95. ($18.95 softbound) For the thousands of University of Utah students who sat in his lively LDS history courses at the LDS Institute of Religion, "T. Edgar Lyon: a Teacher in Zion," by T. Edgar Lyon Jr., will be a pleasant surprise. T. Edgar Lyon was a local institution. Along with his equally famous compatriot Lowell L. Bennion, Lyon gave generously of his time and intellect for more than three decades. He was a well-read historian who believed strongly in teaching and writing authentic history, and he could make it come alive in the classroom. He also had a photographic memory that made him a fountainhead of information. Although sons are not supposed to write about their fathers (for fear that the work will be biased), T. Edgar Lyon Jr. (Ted) has produced a down-to-earth, inside view of his father's life that is remarkably candid and interesting. He manages to capture the essence of a most unusual, gentle man while at the same time measuring his weighty influence. One of T. Edgar Sr.'s former students, President Thomas S. Monson of the LDS Church First Presidency, recalled to the author that it was as a student in Lion's classes that President Monson "really learned the Gospel." Using his father's oral history, a rich legacy of letters, major interviews with contemporaries and his own vivid memory, the younger Lyon builds the story of a young man in a hurry. The biggest surprise to most of Lyon's ardent fans will be the revelation that he was always painfully shy. Yet, he majored in history at the U.; served a successful LDS mission to the Netherlands, constantly struggling with the Dutch language; earned a master's degree from the University of Chicago; married Hermana Forsberg, the love of his life; and he went back to the Netherlands as a 30-year-old mission president, with a wife, two children and twins on the way. (Later the Lyons had a second set of twins.) Lyon received his call to be a mission president personally from LDS Church President Heber J. Grant, who asked how old he was. When he said he was 30, Grant said he'd been criticized for calling young and inexperienced mission presidents. "I'll=20 tell the Twelve when we meet on Thursday that they don't have any reason to criticize me at all. I was a stake president when I was 24 and an apostle when I was 26. You're a mission president at 30. That's getting along in years." He spent more than three decades teaching U. students at the LDS Institute of Religion. Initially, he and Lowell L. Bennion were the only two faculty members =97 through the 1940s, they taught every course themselves. They instructed 1,400 students, each spending an arduous 22 hours a week in the classroom. In addition, Lyon and Bennion spent most evenings overseeing activities of the church-sponsored fraternity, Lambda Delta Sigma. Lyon was known for his open-door policy. In the Institute building, his office downstairs was always open and students continually walked in to ask him questions or seek his advice. It was miraculous that he got any writing done. The younger Lyon also devotes a valuable chapter to describing T. Edgar Sr.'s unique, delightful and effective teaching techniques. Lyon finished his career as historian for "Nauvoo Restoration, Inc.," headed by LeRoy Kimball. For 15 years, he researched old Nauvoo so that architects and builders could restore the city in a manner similar to that of famed Colonial Williamsburg.= =20 He died before he could finish his history of Nauvoo, leaving his notes and early chapters to Glen Leonard, another historian, whose major new history of Nauvoo will be published in June. Enjoy the man and the book, and whatever you do, don't forget to read the footnotes; they're as fascinating as the text. Book pays tribute to longtime LDS institute instructor By Dennis Lythgoe Deseret News staff writer Few people have had a greater impact on LDS students at the University of Utah than T. Edgar Lyon, who instructed some 20,000 over the course of 45 years. Lyon and Lowell L. Bennion taught LDS Church history and doctrine at the LDS Institute adjacent to the U. for almost 40 years, beginning in the late 1930s. Those have been called "the Camelot years" for religious education and intellectual stimulation at the LDS Institute, when students flocked to attend classes taught by one or the other of these two popular teachers. Lyon, a tall, enthusiastic man known for his seemingly endless memory bank, was a careful historian who learned very quickly =97 and retained most of what he learned over the course of his 75 years. Students who sat in his classes or listened to him speak referred to him as "the walking encyclopedia." He was also a deep and original thinker, a man of enormous energy, a man with almost no temper, who exhibited unusual friendliness and openness with his family, his students and his colleagues. At his funeral in 1978, Bennion said, "In him was a total absence of pretense. He never sought the honors of men. He never took the chief seats. . . . I never saw him angry, deceitful, hypocritical or selfish." During a telephone interview from Santiago, Chile, Lyon's son, T. Edgar Lyon Jr. (known as Ted) chatted animatedly about his fondness for his father and about his book, "T. Edgar Lyon: A Teacher in Zion." The younger Lyon is serving as president of the LDS Church's Missionary Training Center in Santiago. "I'd written an earlier book on my great-grandfather, John Lyon, the first Mormon to publish a book of poetry in 1853, and it was a fun project, following his life from Scotland to Utah," Lyon said. "That was 1990. Afterward, I got the idea I should do something on my dad, but I was afraid no one would publish it because he was not well-enough known. I didn't think a professional historian would do it, so I finally did it out of love for my father." Ted Lyon is a scholar and a professor of Latin American literature at BYU, so he understands the scholarly method, and he was determined not to write "a family hagiography." In the process, he wanted to "capture what Mormonism was like when my father was young." He did most of the research for the book from 1993-1996, just before he was called as president of the LDS mission in Chile. Then he wrote the book when he returned home in 1999 and finished it while teaching at Brigham Young University, before he was called back to Chile earlier this year. "When I started the book, I wanted it to be about T. Edgar Lyon, 'authentic historian,' someone concerned with truthful history. But BYU Press wanted me to stress his teaching accomplishments. I ended up with a much longer book and had to cut it by 250 pages before it was published." Lyon feels good about the finished product, because "Dad's biggest influence is not what he's written but all the students he taught. The thing he used to say is that the LDS students going to the U. were sharp, intelligent students. I don't think BYU was sharp enough in those days to get the best students. The team of Lyon and Bennion was part of the drawing card for LDS students going to the U. I was offered a full football scholarship to BYU, but I didn't consider it an academic enough university at the time. Now, of course, I teach there, so things have changed." Ted Lyon sees elements of his father in himself. "I have his hairline, I'm very interested in history and I have a lot of physical stamina and energy. I also have a lot of patience. I'm even-tempered, like my father." But the younger Lyon does not suffer from the severe shyness his father admitted to during his life. Ted Lyon didn't realize his father was naturally shy until he was an adult. "We saw the public persona of T. Edgar =97 but within himself he was always fighting to be that public person." Lynn Lyon (Ted Lyon's twin), currently a physician and U. professor of medicine, is the only one of the six sons who inherited T. Edgar's phenomenal memory. "Lynn's memory is uncanny. I think he remembers some things that didn't happen!" The Bennion-Lyon team broke up in 1962 when Ernest Wilkinson, then BYU president, tried to transfer both of them to the BYU religion department. Both men were greatly saddened to be broken up after a "David-and-Jonathan" relationship, and many of their former students were also crushed. Rather than accept the BYU offer, Bennion moved "across the street" to become associate dean of students at the U. and a professor of sociology. Lyon spent the majority of his time as historian for Nauvoo Restoration Inc. Ted Lyon is especially impressed with the fact that his dad was such a happy man who was able to make a creative contribution to life. "I think to enjoy your work you need a strong love of creativity =97 and Dad had that." Copyright 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 20:31:51 -0700 From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Money and Art On Thu, 09 May 2002 (while I was in between two bouts of computer problems) Jim Picht pichtj@nsula.edu writes: > Who should decide which jobs should pay, and how much? > Not I. I only note, writing is work, and writing that improves > the lives of the people it touches is valuable work. Baking is work, > baking that feeds people who want it is valuable work. Money isn't > part of the equation, and it's a red herring to put it there. > > Jim Picht Yes and no. Money _is_ part of the equation for many millions of people because money is what allows people to keep working. OK, that was the no part. Here's the yes part. About a year ago I started reading Mohammad Yunus's _Banker to the Poor_, an eloquent testament to the dignity of work and the necessity of making available to people the means to accomplish their work. I resonate to Todd Peterson's comments about writing for the love of writing--too readily I resonate. I love Jim's definition of work as something that improves the lives of other people. It resonates deeply with me, and with one of the valuable insights I gleaned from Jim Faulconer's classes. It is very close to the definition of work we arrived at in his (very influenced by Heidegger ("'Eidegger, 'Eidegger was a boozy beggar who could drink you under the table") class on community. I learned a lot from that class. Would I be impertinent to suggest that philosophers who take 20 years to refine their ideas and finish their book, teachers who think deeply and long about great ideas ("In the land of E Pluribus Unum there are many men who sit around all day and think deep thoughts, and they are no more intelligent than you, but they have something you don't have, a diploma,"), and great writing, or who can afford to pay $25 every few months to a web hosting service to self-publish, singers who sing how they "don't care too much for money," and are knighted by the Queen because the tax on their record sales rescues the economy, can do so because they have a steady income? Notice I didn't say "partly because they have a steady income." I'm thinking about the testimony of Virginia Woolf and Tillie Olsen about the minimum conditions necessary to create, a room of one's own and some relief from the constant drudgery of a non-creative job, and the testimony of Ray Carver about how hard it is to write in a borrowed chair (or teach or prepare lessons in one). I remember Tess Gallagher telling our class about the house she built out in the sound (I think) with her reading fees, and how she had taken grief from some of her feminist friends for building the best room in the house for Carver. "If I want to give my man a room to write in, I will." Money is important to me as a writer for one simple reason. Without it I can't practice writing as my profession. Yes, I could do other things. I tried teaching for almost four years at a college where the adjuncts were the lowest paid in the state, had no offices or regular place to meet students and prepare for classes, and taught more classes and students than the fulltime faculty. And while I have been greatly blessed by great teachers, I am not one. I am a great writer (no boast, just a fact: I have great talent--whether I develop it fully or not is another matter) not a great teacher--except I work very well one-on-one or in small groups. So what's left? Support, for example, where I can get on the phone and teach people how to use complex software, or resolve sometimes complex problems with hardware, or software, or the way the two interact. I consistently got quality scores in the top 10% of one company--and productivity in the bottom 10%. I don't work for that company anymore. My talents and patience were a liability. Before that, and before teaching, I spent 19 months on the phones for another company, a company that practically invented tech phone support as a profession--the kings of support. I worked for them at a time when they were deciding that supplying the unlimited free technical support that probably made them the leading word processor was just too expensive, given the drop in software prices generally. (I remember an article in the daily news briefing (from one of ZD's mags, I think) that said the whole industry gave a sigh of relief when they put in their first pay lines.) So my patience and dedication to the customer were a liability to that company as well. And these two companies, six years apart, both came to the same conclusion while I worked there: convert your support reps into a sales force and you can cut down support costs, maybe even make support a profit center. (I pity those poor team leads in the first company who had to tell us with a straight face that after we had solved a difficult problem for an upset customer would be a great time to sell them new services or software, because they would be grateful--who had to stand there with straight faces and listen to our laughter and decide who to layoff after the upcoming merger.) And before that I did some contract writing for a large non-profit org that wanted to translate a 500+ page book into about 100 languages and needed a bunch of writers to go sentence by sentence through the book and write a translator's guide explaining things like the figures of speech and the antecedents for all the pronouns. (English pronouns and their fluidity are particularly difficult for non-native speakers. She kissed him, then he kissed her. How many people are involved in that sentence, 2, 3, 4? There could even be one if you were writing about someone with multiple personalities.) It was a fabulous job, and I did it fulltime for three months, and would have done it full time longer but the software company called me in for an interview. The only writing for pay I've enjoyed as much or more is reporting, where I found a talent for interviewing people and telling their stories, and for relating the dry details of public meetings to how people in the city actually live, for relating and exploring how official decisions, ideas, affect the people who live with their consequences. And that fabulous freelance contract in 1992 (something Bruce Jorgensen, bless him, suggested I look into) rescued me from a terrible job as a political pollster (which, however, gave me valuable practice in recording verbatim people's comments). And before that I was rescued from an increasingly horrible job as a business researcher by some foolish decisions that led to corporate bankruptcy. I dreamed one night, maybe a year before that company self-destructed, that I was driving along and a cop stopped me. It was my supervisor from work (who had married a cop). "You've overqualified your car," she said. And that's been the problem with most of the jobs I've had since grad school, they conflict in important ways with my moral sensibility. Some of the jobs I've had offer very little intellectual stimulation, though that's not necessarily a bad thing. I could go back to the janitorial career that provided me rich material for stories about the homeless in downtown Skedaddle--I discussed that at length over lunch with my brother in a little Greek cafe in Mountlake Terrace one day last October. In some ways having little responsibility, _and_ still having time to write may be better than being such a fine head of technical services that the library cancels your vacation one year (one they knew you'd had been planning for three years) because the new children's library is opening and they just can't spare you. But I don't know how long I would last as Lothar Roper (the much-loved janitor at Wasatch Elementary 30+ years ago). Yes, it would give me the insurance coverage I need for my family, and lots of time to think and write in my head, but very little intellectual challenge. Which is why it would give me time to write in my head. It would also put me in charge of younger workers at a time in my career when I ought to be supervising other workers, but I dread the idea of having to fire someone, just as I hated grading my students as much as I loved teaching them. Heck (St. Provo Girl, If you just said, "Oh my heck," it's not for you.), I can barely stand to send out rejection slips, and have a bunch of poems I need to reject. (I even wince reading that last clause.--hmm, that's risky, dares some smart aleck to say, "I wince reading the whole post.") So I need some job that engages me intellectually and fits my moral sensibility, and my sense of the right livelyhood. (Buddhist phrase, my sister says. If I were to use a more protestant phrase I'd say "life's mission," which Richard Nelson Bolles started writing about in the 7th or 8th edition of _What B&W is Thy Parasail?_ because he's a minister and because job-hunting raises questions of identity. ("Well, Marden, what do you want to be in 10 years," my mother's brother asked his b-in-law answering the question, "What kind of work should I do?") But I hate phrases that have 'mission' in them, unless they are related to the work you train for in the Missionary Training Center. That once impossible word has been co-opted by corporate America ("They robbed all the banks in the Nephite nation, because they had the secret combination.") So what do I do? In the last 15 years, while I haven't enjoyed much earning power I have written millions of words, and through my reporting I've gotten some idea about how to get words in print regularly, and some confidence in my ability to do so. So it seems the best way to earn a living is through what I do best, whether it's technical writing, or reporting, or writing people's oral and family histories, or some combination of all the above. And money _is_ part of that equation because it is a form of energy which allows me to feed and clothe and house my family, power my computer, and watch my garden grow (weeds, mostly, though we do get some mighty good, pickles, grape juice (my vines are dying) apricot jam, and salsa, especially that batch where I threw in the jalapeno seeds along with the rest of the pepper). Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ 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/web/. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 09:52:48 -0500 From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] "Ender's Game" Director Announced On the official Orson Scott Card website, Card confirms an Ain't It Cool News report that German director Wolfgang Petersen has been selected as the director of the "Ender's Game" feature film. The studio is Warner Brothers. Petersen's films include the famed German submarine film "Das Boot." Recent films of his include "A Perfect Storm", "Outbreak" and "Enemy Mine." Petersen is the executive producer of the TV series "The Agency." Interestingly enough, "Enemy Mine" is a highly underappreciated movie, based on a great novella, which is thematically very, very similar to "Ender's Game." If you haven't read the original novella, or seen the movie, you really should do so. If you're a Card fan you'll like either version of "Enemy Mine." [Preston Hunter] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 10:49:45 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] Kimberly Heuston, _The Shakeress_ Some highlights from a recent review in the New York Times Book Review: THE SHAKERESS By Kimberly Heuston. 207 pp. Asheville, N.C.: Front Street. $16.95. (Ages 12 and up) A poor orphan searches for her way in the world, with the help of plucky comrades and her own stout spirit. As she reaches self-knowledge, the handsome heir of a wealthy family sees past her humble garb to ask for her work-stained hand in marriage. Sound like a fairy tale? Kimberly Heuston's thoughtful and ambitious novel "The Shakeress" doesn't end there. True love is not the answer for Naomi, the confident heroine of the title. The book's climax comes not with the lover on his knees in love, but with Naomi on her knees in prayer. In the annals of orphan literature, the success of the Harry Potter series comes largely from the intrigues of wizardry. The energy of this orphan tale set in the 1830's is entirely aimed at the mystery of God. After her parents' deaths in a fire, Naomi and her siblings move to one of the Shaker settlements that dotted New England. The Shaker way of simplicity and work comforts the girl, who develops a talent for herbalism and healing under the watch of a stern but compassionate mentor. Though she's a little too reflective to be convincingly 13, Naomi is sympathetic and likable. As she grows and leaves the Shaker community to become "one of the World's people," our hearts go with her. Where her religious quest takes her, however, not every reader will follow. The world of the novel is authentic early Republic, the time of the Second Great Awakening. Every family Naomi comes across swears by a different religion, and God seems to be everyone's favorite conversational subject. The fervor never leads to conflict, or even mutual disrespect; Heuston, a teacher and first-time novelist, gives us a primer on American religion that is agreeably free of bombast. Her light touch extends to the history as well. Even those who dislike the ostentation of much historical fiction will welcome Heuston's smooth re-creation of New England when parts were still being settled. [...] A children's book about God is almost necessarily proselytizing, but "The Shakeress" suspensefully holds off showing its cards. After Naomi leaves the Shakers to serve as healer in a tiny Vermont village and meet her Prince Charming, it seems possible that hers will be a more personal than denominational resolution. After Heuston transcribes a page-long excerpt from the Book of Mormon, though, the answer to Naomi's questions become increasingly obvious. The ending is a decent surprise, but readers in search of clues to the the author's sympathies might look to the biography on the jacket flap, which gives her home as Salt Lake City. Thankfully, the arrival of revelation doesn't spoil the search. Without subscribing to her religious sympathies, it is possible to appreciate Heuston's sensitive portrayal of religious life. Despite her unadolescent sagacity, Naomi makes an attractive heroine, a girl with lessons to teach beyond the theological. "Life's not designed for cowards. It surely wasn't. You had to grab at it, then plan hard and work harder to make it beautiful, just like a garden." As an independent, self-reliant teenage girl, Naomi provides a model for any quickly maturing questioner, even those who don't share her questions. Her quest is recognizable and welcoming. Tolerance for God-related musings and a God-inspired ending are, however, necessary equipment for this journey. Full review: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/19/books/review/19RODBERT.html?tntemail0 Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 10:51:36 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [AML] "Oh My Heck" T-shirts A strange bit of Mormon cultural influence: SPECIAL NOTICE TO: LDS EVENTS SUBSCRIBERS HUNDREDS OF EMAILS - REQUESTING "OH MY HECK!" TEE Now the whole country is saying it. LDS Living has received hundreds of emails from people around the country requesting the now popular "Oh my heck!" tee-shirts. Made popular by the only Latter-day Saint On "Survivor" this new "Mormon phrase" has swept the country. LDS Living is making them available for a limited time due to the large demand. Click: http://www.ldsliving.com/details.asp?prodid=90210&cat=75&path= Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:54:31 -0700 From: Elizabeth Hatch Subject: [AML] Re: Frankness in Mormon Writing [MOD: Personally, I want to thank Beth for forwarding the quote. It's stimulated some good conversation, and has helped to take the discussion in a direction that it wasn't going before.] D. Michael Martindale wrote: "I'd like to see some evidence for this before swallowing it. Is it > provided in the book? I don't accept their "observations" as convincing > evidence." First, I want to say that I didn't make that statement myself. I was quoting Stephen E. Lamb, M.D., and Douglas E. Brinley, Ph.D. from their book BETWEEN HUBAND AND WIFE: GOSPEL PERSPECTIVES ON MARITAL INTIMACY. (In D. Michael Martindale's post it appears he's quoting me.) I was concerned because this thread seemed to be placing most of the blame on women--I thought it would be valuable to add another perspective. I don't know the sources or evidence the authors used to make their statement. I'm assuming Stephen Lamb's comes from his medical practice. I no longer have the dustcover on my copy of the book, so I called a Deseret Book store and asked the clerk to read me the authors' information listed from one of their dustcovers. She said that "Stephen Lamb is a member of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology." "Douglas E. Brimley is a professor of Church History and Doctrine at BYU. He is the author of many books on family and strengthening marriage." (I scribbled these quotes quickly, but I think they're accurate.) - --Beth Hatch - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:52:24 -0600 From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: Re: [AML] _Attack of the Clones_ (Review) >Everything Eric says is portryaed positively I read as negative - as a >tragedy >that good people got duped by a powerful mastermind. Yes, that is how I read it as well, Ivan. I wouldn't call the movie pro-fascist at all. The fascists, after all, are really the bad guys, even if the real good guys (the Jedi folks) haven't figured that out yet. I feel like the entire series is very pro-democracy. I was, in fact, planning to write a review entitled "I Respectfully Disagree with You, Eric" but they just added 3 mammoth reports to my workload this morning so my review asperations have fallen by the wayside. I will instead pipe in every now and again if/when this becomes a full blown thread! Marianne Hales Harding _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:02:14 -0600 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] _Attack of the Clones_ (Review) Ivan Wolfe wrote: >Eric's response seems to come from someone predisposed to hate the >film >beforehand I can see how someone reading my review would come to this conclusion, but = actually, I still have enough good will in my system from the first two = movies, which I loved and still love, that I very much wanted to like this = one. That's the way it works sometimes, isn't it, that we respond even = more negatively towards something that we desperately wanted to be good. >The republic survived for millenia as a democracy with only minor = >problems ("there's never >been an all out war since the formation of the republic!") Right, they say that, but they never show it. There's never an instant in = either this movie or PM when you see people engaged positively in = politics. The movie makes a big deal about Amidala, for example, and = clearly she's influential and/or a swing vote. So why not show her = negotiating with someone over something? Why not show a committee = meeting? The democracy they describe is utterly inconsistent with any = politics they actually show. And there's time in the movie for it. Cut = ten minutes out of the love story (which suffers greatly from being so = predictable), and show instead Amidala actually dealing with governmental = issues. While Annakin moons over her. =20 >The problems only start occuring when a very evil man (palaptine/darth = >sidious) >is able to gain control over a small group of influential senators. The = >thesis >is that democracy works as long as evil conspiracies don't control the = key >leaders. Three points to make here: 1) Any kind of functioning democracy has checks and balances in place = controlling the damage for those times when the inevitable evil conspiracy = arises. Certainly that's been true in US history (remember Aaron Burr?). = The Republic in this movie seems to have no such mechanisms in place. Or = if it does, we never for a second see them trying to function, so that we = can have some sense of menace when they fail. =20 2) We never see Palpatine doing any of this. Okay, he's this Machiavellian= behind the scenes guy. That could be fun, to see him functioning. = Instead, the movie wastes a solid hour sending Obi-Wan off to find the = clone planet. Obi-Wan as interplanetary gumshoe is sort of a fun notion, = except that Sam Spade always ends up solving the crime, and explaining all = the clues to us, and the result is a satisfying mystery solved. What we = learn here is that some Jedi we've never heard of placed an order for = clones for reasons that are never specified, paid for by or from some = source that's completely unexplained, in order to advance some cause that = remains utterly obscure. =20 What could we have had? A battle of wits between a huge criminal = mastermind intent on twisting the political process for his own evil = purposes and an equally brilliant good guy, using obscure and difficult = clues to sort everything out, well, that's sort of what's going on in this = movie, Sidious vs. Yoda. The only thing that's missing is . . . everything= , all the scenes in which Sidious twists the political process and all the = scenes where Yoda tries to sort it out. =20 3) From a structural standpoint, this is hugely problematic. Palpatine = becomes the only volitional character in the movie. He's consequently the = protagonist, and everyone else is his puppet. That's just poor writing. That's my complaint about the movie. It's so poorly written, by which I = do NOT mean poor dialogue. Occasional lines of bad dialogue aren't = important. It's just that a large and complex story doesn't get told in = any way coherently, so that no one in it behaves rationally or intelligentl= y at all. =20 Re: Yoda's use of the Storm Troopers: =20 >This wasn't portrayed as a good thing. basically the good guys were = >snookered.=20 >Or did you miss the "Imperial March" musical cues played with the = >troopers? One possible explanation for the Storm Troopers scene might be that the = good guys were snookered. The music cues are there, adding very creepy = overtones. But the movie absolutely does not say in any straightforward = way that the good guys were snookered. We can infer that, and maybe the = next movie will clear it up, but right now, they're on the side of = characters we think of as good. In fact, they are the agents of the obligatory cliffhanger rescue--our = heros are surrounded, their doom is imminent, and then, tantara, the = calvary rides over the hill. That's the structural function of the storm = troopers in this movie. They put the deus in deus es machina. =20 Besides, if I go to see a movie called Attack of the Clones, that title = tells me two things; there are going to be Clones in it, and they're going = to attack something. And usually it's possible to infer that this is = going to be a bad thing. But in this movie, the clones don't attack = anything. They rescue the good guys, very different verb. And they're on = the side of the good guys. At least for now, they are. =20 In the first movie, you had a monolithic government, the Empire, and = rebels against it, the Rebel Alliance, and you knew exactly who the good = guys and bad guys were. The bad guys, among other things, blew up = populated planets. In this movie, you've got the Republic, a large = monolithic entity, and they're a functioning democracy, so they're the = good guys, maybe, except that we never see it function and have no idea = why they're good. And you've got rebels, seceding planets, and they're = bad, I suppose because Christopher Lee is on their side, and he's always a = a bad guy. But we don't know what their grievances are, why they're = leaving, what steps have been taken to placate them, what's at stake, what = human rights violations have taken place by who against who. Instead we = get portentous pronouncements about how the Dark Side is growing in = strength. Not. Good. Enough. Look, it's just a bad movie, not as bad as the last one, but bad enough. = It's bad because George Lucas can't write anymore, and there's no one = around that can tell him that. It's bad because he's completely tone deaf = when it comes to racial issues. It's bad because he's been reading too = much Joseph Campbell. It's bad because he's plugged into the worst = anti-politician rhetoric, because audiences are disposed to dislike and = mistrust politicians. I feel lousy saying this, because he made (well, = produced) two wonderful movies that I will always love and cherish, and a = third movie that isn't bad and at least ties up story ends more or less = satisfactorily (except for Darth in Heaven, an even worse idea than = Ewoks). Since then, nada, two very expensive very bad movies. It's = really a shame. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:54:53 -0600 From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] _Attack of the Clones_ (Review) ___ Eric ___ | But the fact is, for all the politics in this movie, there's | no sense of, you know, actual poltics. Compromise, debate, | discussion, finding a middle ground, balancing the needs of | constituents over one's personal beliefs; there's none of | that in the movie. ___ I'm not quite sure that is fair. While I think there is still plenty to criticize about the style of the film, I believe Lucas is talking about the loss of democracy and not democracy itself. The Amidalah character mentions in passing the very things you bring up. However the film is primarily more an adventure flick that focuses in on how we can be taken over to the dark side. On the political image side I think he is invoking the archetypes of how Rome lost her "democracy" and also the descent to totalitarianism in Nazi Germany. Notice that everything in the political arena is being manipulated by the Chancellor. He sets up the conflict which divides the Republic. One also gets the distinct impression that Yoda knows this and also is willing to go along with things for his own unknown reasons. >From an LDS point of view this is rather interesting in light of both Book of Mormon events and also prophecies about the last days of America. While I think Lucas is still rather ham fisted as a director, this is an interesting archetype. I'm not sure how well it mixes with the overall adventure story, mind you. But it is also interesting how Annakin represents the personification of what is going on in civilization at large. Thus Annakin's inner turmoils (and views of democracy) are the same turmoils that civilization as a whole feels. The regular Jedi seem skeptical of all politicians, but like the early American founding fathers, see them as a necessary evil. Annakin sees efficiency as more valuable than a messy democracy and is willing to see the "helpful" politician as one who can solve the problems. Lest people think this too unlikely a scenario, similar things took place during the Great Depression in the United States with the great populace leader Huey Long. While in that case the Great Depression wasn't really the result of manipulation, it oft times is scary how willing people are to give up their agency in the political arena. Further, Lucas ties this to how willing people are to give up their spiritual/ethical agency in terms of Annakin. This tying of the public arena with the inner arena is fairly typical of the Book of Mormon as literature and Jewish literature in general. I think Ivan answered most of Eric's other criticism, so I'll not repeat them. I do think that Eric missed the whole secret combination aspect of the film. The point is that everything is being manipulated and there are secret societies behind what is going on. Assassinations, betrayals, and so forth. Echoes of 3rd Nephi indeed. - -- Clark Goble --- clark@lextek.com ----------------------------- - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:27:59 -0700 (PDT) From: William Morris Subject: Re: [AML] _Attack of the Clones_ (Review) This discussion reminds me of an article from "The Weekly Standard" (link cribbed from Slate magazine)by Jonathan V. Last that makes the case for why the empire in the Star Wars universe is a preferred mode of governance: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/248ipzbt.asp A couple of highlights: The Jedi are a group of "arrogant royalist Swiss guard." At least the empire is a meritocracy; whereas, the Jedi order is based on biology (those wacky mitochlorians). And finally a long quote: "But the most compelling evidence that the Empire isn't evil comes in "The Empire Strikes Back" when Darth Vader is battling Luke Skywalker. After an exhausting fight, Vader is poised to finish Luke off, but he stays his hand. He tries to convert Luke to the Dark Side with this simple plea: "There is no escape. Don't make me destroy you. . . . Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy." It is here we find the real controlling impulse for the Dark Side and the Empire. The Empire doesn't want slaves or destruction or "evil." It wants order. None of which is to say that the Empire isn't sometimes brutal. In Episode IV, Imperial stormtroopers kill Luke's aunt and uncle and Grand Moff Tarkin orders the destruction of an entire planet, Alderaan. But viewed in context, these acts are less brutal than they initially appear. Poor Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen reach a grisly end, but only after they aid the rebellion by hiding Luke and harboring two fugitive droids. They aren't given due process, but they are traitors." Now whether you agree with the author's political stance or not, the whole exercise comes off as a little silly, imo. It's the danger of extrapolating politics from a cultural product. And yet, I wonder about how we (Mormons, American citizens) conceptualize politics and the political sphere. Certainly the media culture (both "reporting" and "creative work") colors our thinking. Much of my conception of how power works---how it is accrued, how it is exercised, how it corrupts---comes from scriptural and literary texts. ~~William Morris __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #719 ******************************