From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V2 #31 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 21 2003 Volume 02 : Number 031 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 22:57:35 -0600 From: "Mary Jane Jones" Subject: [AML] Hip-Hop (was: Time Heals Artistic Wounds) dmichael@wwno.com wrote: "But when it comes to rap and hip-hop, there I draw the line. I can't believe that it's a mere subjective, generational thing that these forms of alleged music actually have artistic merit. My father called my music "noise," but I truly can't accept these new manifestations of pop "music" as anything but. (snip...) "So I have hope that my aversion to such music is an absolute aesthetic, not mere old-fogyism." I have this conversation about once a week with my husband when he walks = into my office and hears Outkast or Missy Elliott on my computer speakers. = I am (in conversation with him, anyway) a staunch defender of hip-hop as = an intensely powerful form of artistic expression, one that has forever = changed the face of popular music the way jazz and rock did for previous = generations. It has captured the poetry, the energy, the charisma and = yes, the anger of an entire subculture and made them relevant to the = mainstream (doesn't that sound like a worthy goal for LDS artists?). And = along the way it captured the imaginations of a lot of people around the = world. (You haven't really lived until you've heard Indian or S. Korean = rappers rhyming - there are some that are actually pretty good without = being derivative).=20 I will gladly concede that a lot of rap is hedonistic, violent or = bordering on pornographic. But so is a good chunk of rock and roll. And = I know my grandparents didn't have kind thoughts about jazz musicians back = in their day either. And so an understanding/education of the genre and = of the artists is necessary (as in any genre) to sort the wheat from the = chaff. (At the risk of opening myself to attack) I would challenge anyone = seriously interested in music to listen to Lauryn Hill's "The Miseducation = of Lauryn Hill" and not find that album a powerful artistic experience. = Erykah Badu, Jill Scott, the Beastie Boys, even more hard-core artists = like Naz, Ice-T, Notorious B.I.G. and even Eminem can bring work with = outstanding artistic merit to the table. I would welcome the day that an LDS poet with guts and talent could bring = a beat to their experiences and share them with the rest of us. Here's = one hip-hop fan that would be thrilled--as long as the beats were fresh = and the messages honest. Because that's really what I believe any = artistic expression is all about. Mary Jane Ungrangsee - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 01:23:10 EDT From: RichardDutcher@aol.com Subject: [AML] Passion in Art Our recent conversations regarding the film version of CHICAGO reminded me o= f=20 a post I have been intending to write for several months. Here it is. It may= =20 turn out to be rather lengthy, but I think it will be worth the time. A little over a year ago I was in New York City auditioning actors for "The=20 Prophet." I decided to take in a couple of shows. I've never been much of a=20 fan of musical theater, but I really wanted to see LES MISERABLES and CHICAG= O=20 on Broadway. I saw LES MISERABLES first. It was fine. I was expecting more. It felt prett= y=20 limp. No passion or joy in the performances. I left the theater glad that I=20 had seen it, but a little disappointed. Then, on my last night in the city, I saw CHICAGO. From the front row. Wow. The music was wonderful. The dancers were phenomenal. The Bob=20 Fosse-inspired choreography was riveting. The actors/singers were world=20 class. The loud, biting script was sharp and mean and often funny. I loved=20 it. I mean, I absolutely LOVED IT. I had never had such a powerful theatrica= l=20 experience. It knocked me out. I walked away from the show in something of a daze. I honestly don't think I= =20 have ever seen such a powerful display of talent. Everyone in the cast=20 appeared to be performing at the very edge of their abilities, pushing their= =20 talents to their limits. Not just the singers and dancers, but the musicians= ,=20 the writers, the director, the choreographer. That was over a year ago. And I still haven't been able to shake the experie= n ce. I bought the soundtrack and I listen to it fairly often. And the music=20 brings back the experience. I often find myself meditating on my experience=20 with CHICAGO. It had a profound effect on me. (By the way, although I enjoye= d=20 the movie version, it is a pale imitation of the live Broadway show.) So how do I put what I have felt/learned/decided into words so that I can=20 share it with you? First of all, let's put aside the "morality" of the show. I could easily=20 argue that it is one of the most immoral works of theatrical art. I could=20 just as easily turn around and argue that it is one of the most moral. But i= t=20 is an argument that doesn't interest me. Here's what I was most impressed with: artists pushing themselves to the=20 breaking point. At the end of that show, I truly felt that the performers ha= d=20 spent themselves, that they would need pharmaceutical assistance if they wer= e=20 required to sing one more song or dance one more number. I felt that I=20 experienced the composer and writers and choreographers working at the top o= f=20 their game. It was exhilarating. I would have paid a thousand dollars during= =20 my threadbare college days to experience it. Why? Because=E2=80=A6I don't th= ink I had=20 ever witnessed it before. At least not from the front row.=20 I saw the straining effort in the muscles of their legs, in the muscles of=20 their throats, in the constant streams of sweat pouring off their bodies. It= =20 was amazing. Their talent combined with their passion. That's what it is!=20 That's what I'm getting at! Talent and passion. Pushed to the limit. I know I can't speak for the rest of you. I can only speak for myself, so I=20 examine my own work over the past few years and I find myself wanting. True,= =20 I've exceeded my limits in some areas. Some who are close to me think that I= =20 have pushed myself too far, that I have exhausted myself and broken myself=20 financially, emotionally, spiritually. And, I admit, they have a point.=20 Trying to get "The Prophet" off the ground has just about destroyed me, my=20 health, my faith, my family's security.=20 But all of that is incidental to the subject at hand, to the creativity.=20 After all, I still haven't shot the film! I may have pushed myself to the=20 limit in other ways, but have I pushed myself to the limit CREATIVELY? That'= s=20 the question. Have I poured everything I know and feel into my filmmaking?=20 I've made four films, but have I ever performed cinematically with the=20 passion that I saw on the CHICAGO stage? No, I haven't. Not in a movie. But=20= I=20 know the experience because I've done it as an actor on stage. I know what i= t=20 feels like to perform at the edge. To walk off the stage and collapse in=20 physical and emotional exhaustion. I look at my work lately and I see so clearly the restraints I have placed o= n=20 myself. Where is anything that I have done where you can see my bare soul=20 exploding on the movie screen? Have you ever seen me cut loose with a camera= =20 and show you what I can really do? No, you haven't. Why not? Because I=20 haven't done it! Because I've held back! I've been polite and modest and=20 restrained, all good and well behind the podium in sacrament meeting, but=20 death behind a movie camera. For whatever reason, I haven't been fulfilling the measure of my creation. I= =20 haven't taken the talents the Lord has given me and magnified them to their=20 potential. Why not? That's the question that CHICAGO put into my brain. And=20= I=20 can only answer with my work. I know that, for me, it's time to cut loose. The passion and (I hope) the=20 talent are there. It's time to live passionately and create passionately. To= =20 work at the frayed edge of my energies and abilities. I want to find the wal= l=20 and break through and see what's on the other side. I want to show my God that he is right in entrusting me with some measure of= =20 creativity. That, with the few colors and stubby brushes that he allows me,=20= I=20 paint some beautiful, powerful, original pictures. That I do the absolute be= st I can. Then maybe he'll open up the store and give me unlimited, eternal=20 resources. I think that's basically what I have to say. But as I read over the past=20 several paragraphs, I feel that I've done a fairly poor job of communicating= =20 my thoughts and feelings, which is truly unfortunate. Because I'd love to be= =20 able the share this euphoric, passionate frustration with all of you. I have= =20 a painful dissatisfaction with what I have produced in the past, and a=20 ferocious optimism for what I will do in the future. Both feel right and=20 good. I am growing tired of timid art. I wish I could take the entire AML group to New York and share the CHICAGO=20 experience. I'd like to see if anyone else gets the jolt I got.=20 Do we have any lurking millionaires that would be willing to foot the bill?=20 Richard Dutcher - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 01:31:02 EDT From: RichardDutcher@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Artists' Personal Lives In a message dated 4/18/2003 11:16:33 PM Mountain Daylight Time, kcmadsen@utah-inter.net writes: > Bigotry, > adultery, murder, war, child abuse, racism. Love, forgiveness, > acceptance, loyalty, honor. The words only mean something in comparison. > Beautifully put, Kim. I think I'll print that out and put it up on my bulletin board. Richard Dutcher - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 01:42:23 EDT From: RichardDutcher@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Validity of Memory and Nonfiction In a message dated 4/18/2003 11:13:58 PM Mountain Daylight Time, annette@lyfe.com writes: > Re: D. Michael Martindale's Brother Brigham > > If several readers didn't buy your character's actions, then it's a good > chance the characterization in your writing needs work, regardless of how > well you personally know Sheila. Plenty of characters in literature do > things "most" people don't do--but they are so well drawn that readers DO > believe it--they know as well as the author does that that's exactly what > the character would do. > Gotta stand up for D. I've read BROTHER BRIGHAM and Sheila is a sharply-drawn, believable and consistent character. In my opinion, the comments from the readers reveal more about themselves and their attitudes toward auto-genital-manipulation than about D's writing skill or the character of Sheila. Richard Dutcher - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 16:35:53 -0700 (PDT) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Does Theory Matter? Here is an article from "The New York Times" to keep in mind when thinking about the possibility of constructing a "conservative literary theory." (Or indeed, the utility of any literary theory.) Free registration is required to read it: The Latest Theory Is That Theory Doesn't Matter April 19, 2003 By EMILY EAKIN These are uncertain times for literary scholars. The era of big theory is over. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/19/arts/19CRIT.html?ex=1051968136&ei=1&en=f8c329a1815900ee ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 08:51:09 -0400 From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] Advertise in Irreantum I'm happy to report that the ad Mormon Arts and Letters placed in the recent issue of Irreantum has led to sales! So, I believe its worth doing. Kent Larsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 07:55:51 -0600 From: Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [AML] NAIFEH, _Mormon Murders_ Review Available? Rich Hammett wrote: >Does anybody know of a good, critical review of "The Mormon >Murders..." by Naifeh? I mean one that examines factual >problems, etc? It's being recommended to some friends of >mine for its accurate portrayal of mormonism. Try David Whittaker's review in _BYU Studies_ 29, no. 1. Marny Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 08:15:10 -0600 From: Kim Madsen Subject: RE: [AML] Apologies Harlow Clark aka Hollow Cluck wrote: "So if you think you have a moral obligation (which is what should means as a modal of shall) to be offended at me please let me know so I can repent of the offense." I swear this boy is ee cummings incarnate. "because, because and so because..." Kim Madsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 10:24:04 -0400 From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] Deseret Book Announces New Division At 10:16 PM -0700 4/15/03, you wrote: >What this means is that Deseret is going to get into the business of >distributing works they do not publish. This is what Publishers >Distribution, Origin, and Evans Book used to do and it is still the >principal business of Granite Publishing, and to a large extent CFI. Brigham >Book Distributing (I think that's the name) up in Brigham City is trying to >enter this market. They will probably be edged out by Deseret now. Are you saying that Brigham will be edged out? Or that all these distributors will be edged out? You are right, of course, that this is a volume business, but I'm not convinced that Deseret Book will be able to edge out these other distributors unless they "cheat" i.e., refuse to buy from them for their stores. This is exactly the problem with this move, of course - -- it is potentially anti-competitive. Distribution businesses win new clients by price (i.e., the proportion of the sale that they give to the publisher) and by reach (i.e., how well they can sell titles - which stores purchase books from them and how many they purchase). At least Granite and CFI have their reach pretty well set already. Brigham is working hard at it. And somehow I doubt that Deseret Book will set its price lower (i.e., give the publishers more) than the other distributors. On the other hand, if Deseret Book doesn't either set its price lower or refuse to buy from the other three distributors, how will it get clients? > >This is a smart move if done correctly. It could allow Deseret to >essentially take over the distribution end of the LDS market, leaving the >small publishers to do nothing but publish, then pass their products over to >Deseret to distribute. It is not a terribly profitable venture unless it's >done on a large scale, and I think Deseret has the best shot in the LDS >market to achieve that scale. (In the trade market, Ingram and Baker & >Taylor are the big national distributors.) This will essentially >consolidate the LDS market in the hands of Deseret, but that may not be a >bad thing, depending on how open they are to different kinds of product. Sorry, Richard, but I can't see how this is anything but a bad thing. Competition generally leads to lower prices and greater distribution. I don't see how consolidating the LDS market in the hands of Deseret Book will do anything but make it harder for anything that doesn't win Deseret's seal of approval to be sold. And it may simply lead to higher prices for what does get sold. Where is the upside that you see and I'm missing? >It >may take some big internal changes, though. Deseret's wholesale arm has been >notorious for creating ill-will amongst their (non-Deseret) customers. >Perhaps Sherri Dew will correct that problem and with her correction add >this powerful new twist. Verrrry interesting. > >Richard Hopkins > I hope you are correct that Sheri Dew will fix this problem. Kent - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 08:31:25 -0600 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Time Heals Artistic Wounds > D. Michael wrote: > >But when it comes to rap and hip-hop, there I draw the line. I can't > >believe that it's a mere subjective, generational thing that these forms > >of alleged music actually have artistic merit. My father called my music > >"noise," but I truly can't accept these new manifestations of pop > >"music" as anything but. The funniest thing happened. I'm too young for these bands, about 5 years, but I loved Blue Cheer, Deep Purple, Steppenwolf, Procol Harum, Grand Funk, Black Sabbath, Jethro Tull, Jimi Hendrix, Traffic and The Doors. They were so powerful and dangerous. I bathed in their music, was comforted and fortified by it. They gave words to my feeling: "Hey, you, keep your head down. Don't you look around. Please, don't make a sound. If they should find you now, the Man will shoot you down" (Steppenwolf--Renegade). And: "Can you give me sanctuary? I must find a place to hide . . . a place for me to hide" (The Doors--Sanctuary). That music was intense, so dangerous. And threatening. It was one of the few things I could count on when things were tough. Well, my wife went and bought a greatest hits album of The Doors--talk about dangerous people. Jim Morrisson, forget about it. Heavy and intense to the max. We played it--now thirty years since I depended on that music--and it was kind of fun. Kind of jaunty, and kind of innocent. And I said, "Whoa! My memory has been betrayed!" It's one of those things that make you wonder if anything is real. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 08:43:57 -0600 From: Kim Madsen Subject: [AML] RE: Hip-Hop Justin Halverson wrote: "Hip-hop's greatest strength, as I see it, lies in its ability (maybe even it's need, its raison d'etre) to assimilate across genres and time periods, and in that assimilation to both contest the past and generate new styles, new combinations--in a process something like, dare I, T.S. Eliot's as he sought to, "sampling" from tradition, rejuvenate tired metaphors." Yeah, and it's easy to dance to. Kim Madsen, shallow and moved by the beat - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 09:33:46 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] _Chicago_ >-----Original Message----- >I never had the sense that they were poking >fun at anything. The puppet scene didn't just reek of satire for you? One of the key features of satire is to take a real situation and exaggerate in an extreme way. Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 09:49:22 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: [AML] Max Golightly Playwriting Contest >-----Original Message----- >From: Richard B.Johnson >family so long). Did he ever complete it? I don't believe that Max Golightly ever completed his PhD. I seem to recall it was a sore spot with him. Max accepted the first play I ever wrote as a major production of the BYU 1972 season. It was called "A Sceptre, A Sword, A Scented Rose," a dramatization of the story of Lamon and Ammon. I had only written the first act and he had cast and was rehearsing while I was up in his office finishing off the play on his IBM Selectric typewriter. =20 He also gave me my second favoritist acting job. The play was "I Never Sang For My Father." I had tried for the lead, didn't get it, but he came to me afterwards and asked me if I wanted to play three minor roles spread throughout the play. And these were minor roles - a waiter coming on and putting things on a table. A porter from a train station. The largest of the three roles was a doctor who said maybe three lines. Max encouraged me to make each character as different as I could. It was great fun. I played the first character as a black man. For the waiter, I sprayed my hair red and adopted a swishy gait. The final character was a gray-haired doctore with a Bostonian accent. By the way, while we're on the subject, let me share the following with all you LDS writer-folk: The 2003 Max C. Golightly Memorial Playwrighting Competition - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - -------- Named in honor of Max Chatterton Golightly, BYU professor, director, actor, author, lyricist. His positive influence over his students and the people who saw his plays and musicals is incalculable. His productions were always First Class. He encouraged so many authors to do great things.=20 He was my mentor, my writing collaborator and my friend. - -- C. Michael Perry, President -- ENCORE Performance Publishing We are searching for the best plays by Latter-day Saint authors. The prizes awarded will be a publication contract and entrance into Encore's catalog of plays, and a write up on Encore's website. In addition, there will be a small advance on the royalties. First Prize will include a production at BYU-Idaho, directed by Hyrum Conrad. Other scripts may receive readings , even staged readings, by the Nauvoo Historical Society at the Center Street Theatre in Orem, Utah under the Artistic Direction of J. Scott Bronson.=20 What is eligible: 1. Plays, short plays, and musicals based on LDS themes, historical events with LDS characters or with LDS viewpoints and/or LDS World view with non-LDS characters. 2. All plays, short plays, and musicals must have been produced prior to their submission to the contest. If the entry is unproduced, see below. 3. Plays should be uplifting as well as instructive and reflective of the LDS Doctrine. 4. Submissions are open to ALL authors, whether currently published by Encore or not. Of course, current titles published by Encore are NOT eligible. How to Submit: 1. All plays must be submitted in printed and bound form. No E-mail submissions. All manuscripts should be 8.5x11, three hole punched and bound in some sort of report cover. Please, no cerlox, spiral or velo-bind submissions. A video of the production may be included. 2. If musicals are submitted please submit, in addition to the manuscript of the play, a video of a production or a complete music demo tape of the score. Please do not send printed musical scores. 3. A production history of the entry listing producing organization(s), year(s) produced and director(s). Unproduced entries will need 2 letters of recommend: one from a Bishop or Stake President who has read the play and one from a professor of Theatre on the University level. 4. Resum=E9s or Vita sheets for each author. 5. Manuscripts should be submitted to: Golightly Memorial Playwrighting Competition Encore Performance Publishing PO Box 692, Orem Utah 84059. Unless an SASE large enough to accommodate the return of your materials is included with your submission all materials will be destroyed at the end of the contest. Encore reserves the right to make no awards or to make multiple awards. Deadline for submissions: All entries must be postmarked by December 31, 2003. All awards, if any, will be made by February 28, 2004 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 10:50:10 -0600 From: "Eugene Woodbury" Subject: Re: [AML] Artists' Personal Lives D. Michael Martindale wrote: >By the way, I don't understand why Eugene set up >a dichotomy between empathy and observation. I wasn't setting up a dichotomy between empathy and observation; rather I was stating that empathy should not trump (be prized above) observation. In other words, as I'm lying on the gurney in the back of the ambulance, I care much less about whether you, the EMT, can "feel my pain" than what you can do about it. The moral point of the movie "The Doctor," is that William Hurt, by himself being stricken with cancer, comes to empathize with his patients and the people around him in a way that he had not before. Yet, at the heart of this empathy is his rediscovered ability to observe, to see what he had refused to see before. Hence the expression that an experience "opens your eyes." Glen Sudbury wrote: >Everyone I've met in my 57 years seems to have sufficient >positive and negative experiences to create from, regardless >of the medium they choose to become skilled at, or not. I completely agree with Glen that even the most "normal" of human lives is replete with enough personal suffering to fuel the creation of "great art." While I'm not sure that swatting a mosquito will give you any insights into murder (though it seems that an awful lot of serial killers started out killing small mammals), it's amazing what you can learn from a short ride to the emergency room--and for a not-life-threatening malady. (Most of the suffering in my case came from the consequential dealings with the insurance company.) The problem is that for too many "artists," the grass is always browner on the other side of the fence. [Eugene Woodbury] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 20:50:35 -0600 From: "Ben and Jessie Christensen" Subject: Re: [AML] Rape in Mormon Lit > And, he didn't turn into a jerk, he always was one. At least one > underlying issue in the book is who we as a culture look at as being > *good*. He looked good to her, and she ignored signs that maybe he > was not all she was looking for--with all the emotionally issues with > her family thrown in for good measure. I think you bring up one of the reasons why I liked the book--the jerky guy who rapes people came from a "normal" seeming family with very respectable parents. He also dressed well, had a nice car, did well in school, and for all general appearances was a "good" person. Hannah even hung around with his family and they welcomed her into their home, until she got pregnant. I thought that was a contrast to far too many Mormon books, especially YA ones, where the guy who is the wrong choice is obviously so by his bad appearance and general juvenile delinquent manner. I was thinking about this recently because of a movie review the other day talking about a new movie about high school students (Better Luck Tomorrow), which is all about well-off honors students in Southern California. The reviewer thought it interesting that everyone in the movie partied hard, even the "high-achievers"; he specifically cited a scene where the entire debate team gets drunk while celebrating a victory. This made me realize that there still seems to be a dichotomy in many adult's minds that there are "good kids" and "bad kids", and only losers drink, smoke and sleep around. Unfortunately, the kids in both high schools I went to managed to drink themselves sick on the weekends and still become valedictorians and get into Harvard. I guess my point is that the stereotypes (which I think are fading, luckily) of the "bad crowd" and the "losers" that we get warned about in Young Womens are unfortunately outdated. As one reveiwer mentioned, most teens lead R-rated lives, but are barred from seeing movies that accurately depict their lives. I don't see that necessarily as a bad thing, but I hope our literature for young adults will begin to represent more accurately the complex realities of high school today. "Everybody's doing it" will always be a terrible excuse, but telling kids that drinking and sleeping around will ruin their future doesn't cut it anymore either. Jessie Christensen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 15:06:05 -0500 From: "Scott Lancaster" Subject: Re: [AML] NAIFEH, _Mormon Murders_ Review Available? You will find a good review containing critical comments of Naifeh's book in the New York Times Book Review, Oct. 9, 1988, p. 28. You can find it in Lexis Nexus. The review compares "A Gathering of Saints" with the Naifeh book. The critical portions mention "...the failure to provide the religious context and history that so dominated the case. The authors' prose seems rushed and relies often on cliche.... Their treatment of the Mormon Church hierarchy is often snide and sarcastic. While some of the actions of church leaders may be deserving of ridicule, the tone that Mr. Naifeh and Mr. Smith occasionally use detracts from their portrayals.... Frequently, sensitive information is presented without attribution." No one else that I can find has cared enough to do more than a perfunctory and brief review of the book. An article about several psychopathic murderer books in New Leader, Sept. 5, 1988 by Barry Gewen entitled "The Appeal of the Psychopath". He notes on page 19 that it is a trait of such "true crime" books to direct anger and blame not at the psychopath, but elsewhere. He uses Naifeh's anger at the Church rather than at Hoffmann as an example. I suppose there could be material in Sunstone or other such publications that aren't in my index databases. Scott Lancaster Gee Library Texas A&M-Commerce - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 21:27:02 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Validity of Memory and Nonfiction Annette Lyon wrote: > Unlike Richard, you just decreased my interest in reading the book. Here's > why: > If several readers didn't buy your character's actions, then it's a good > chance the characterization in your writing needs work, regardless of how > well you personally know Sheila. Plenty of characters in literature do > things "most" people don't do--but they are so well drawn that readers DO > believe it--they know as well as the author does that that's exactly what > the character would do. > > You can't expect the reader to say, "Well, I'm sure the *author* knows this > character would act that way. I'll take his word for it." Good point, but this reading group seems to be the only ones, as far as I recall, who objected to the characterization. Some objected to my presenting the scene, but not the characterization itself. (If someone did, and I forgot, let me know.) I don't want to get to deeply into criticizing a group who's not here to defend themselves, but they seem to have a shared affinity for Oprah's Dr. Phil, and what he says is given great weight in that group. Their disbelief in Sheila's masturbation, as they explicitly stated, was directly related to things he said on his program. I'm sorry, but I simply can't get too upset over a criticism of my characterization that is based on "Dr. Phil said it doesn't happen." - -- 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 23:26:24 -0600 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] Self-Indulgent Authors (was: Gene WOLFE, _Book of the New Sun_) Jonathan Langford wrote: > What Makes These Books So Hard > ========================= > Several things here: > > * Density of detail. > * Confusing plot lines. > * Vocabulary. > * Digressions on philosophy. > * General style. Now this is something I truly don't get. In the past, some people on this list have seemed to argue in favor of prose that's difficult to get into. It was in conjunction with the thread about beginnings. Gene Wolf looks like a different manifestation of that discussion. My question is, why on earth make your writing hard to read? Is it necessary for Gene Wolf to write dense detail, confusing plots, vocabulary no one's ever heard of, digress into philosophy, or have a generally tedious writing style, for his stories to offer the good things that Jonathan listed? Please, someone, explain it to me! One of the most consistent praises I've received about my book is that it's easy to read. This is music to my ears. What good does it do me to write some of the most profound, inspiring, soul-magnifying prose imagined by mortal man if it's too hard for people to read? Why shouldn't Gene Wolfe or anyone else write in a style that maximizes the audience who can appreciate him, if there's so much of value in what he writes? Why is clarity not considered one of the most essential virtues for a writer? To me, the message is the important thing. The medium is there only to convey the message. If the medium gets in the way, that's a bad thing. (This is no doubt why I detest poetry. By definition, the medium IS the art in poetry.) Be as artistic as you want with your words--as long as it doesn't interfere with the message. If people have to force themselves to continue reading Gene Wolfe, this is a clear indication that the medium is interfering. It's a clear indication (in my opinion) that Gene Wolfe needs a good editor. Unless of course, Gene Wolfe doesn't care if anybody reads his stuff. I care if someone reads my stuff. I want the whole world to read my stuff. You won't find difficult writing in my work. Difficult concepts, you bet, but difficult writing? No way! The only thinking I want my readers to do is to wrestle with the challenging ideas I present them. I don't want them wasting brain power trying to figure out what some arcane word means. One of my favorite stories is Victor Hugo's _Les Miserables_. But it is _not_ one of my favorite books. Hugo wrote in a style accessible to his generation, but it's a challenge for us modern people to get through. I think the story is one of the most powerful illustrations of the teachings of Jesus I've ever encountered. But I'd love the story to be rewritten into something accessible to the modern reader (and I may do it someday). In the "beginnings" thread, there were a number of people who defended authors who wrote difficult openings to their books. I still don't see it. I want to know what the author has to say. I don't want to wade through a self-indulgent blockade to their story. In fact, I won't. Nor do I think anyone else should. That goes for beginnings, middles, endings--any part of the book. If Gene Wolfe is that hard to read, I won't be reading him, I don't care how many gems are inside his books. Too many other authors have enough respect for me to set those gems out where I can access them without unnecessary struggle. Standard rebuttal: "If you don't work for it, you won't appreciate it as much." True, but there is such a thing as necessary and unnecessary work. Wrestling with challenging ideas is plenty enough work for me to appreciate the results. I don't need self-indulgent yahoos throwing up artificial barriers just to get to the ideas. Especially after Eric quantified for us how few works we'll be able to consume in one lifetime. - -- 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 02:36:06 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] TWAIN & NELSON, _Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer_ (Daily Herald) [Nelson is publishing this book through Cedar Fort. There is a description of the book at http://www.cedarfort.com/catalog/1555176801.html ] The Daily Herald on Thursday, April 17 Lee Nelson, co-author of "Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer Among the Indians," will present portions of his book at 7:30 tonight in the Tree Room Library at Sundance Village. In 1885, Twain began this book with Huck and Tom attempting a daring rescue of a girl kidnapped by American Indians. For reasons unknown, Twain suddenly stopped writing in the middle of a sentence, and the unfinished manuscript collected dust for more than a hundred years. Then in a landmark literary event, the University of California Press and the Mark Twain Foundation authorized Utah author Lee Nelson to finish the book. Nelson finished the story through the eyes of a lovesick Huck on a journey across a continent to rescue the woman he loves. The reading is free. Patrons may enjoy dinner in the Foundry Grill or the Tree Room prior to the reading. Call 223-4220 for dinner reservations. Copyright 2002 by HarkTheHerald.com _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 02:44:16 +0000 From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] ROGERS, "Heubener" (Deseret News) Sunday, April 20, 2003 Auditions THE BOUNTIFUL PERFORMING ARTS CENTER, 745 S. Main, has started rehearsals for the World War II drama "Heubener," directed by the playwright, Thomas Rogers, but several male performers are still needed for two of the double-cast principal roles and some small parts. Performances are May 14-June 11. Those interested in auditioning should call 294-7469 or send an e-mail to assistant director Elizabeth Hatch at elizabeth@bpac.cc. Copyright 2003 Deseret News Publishing Company _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V2 #31 *****************************