--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Thu Jun 6 02:07:10 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA11670 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 02:06:59 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (daemon@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id CAA11695; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 02:06:43 -0700

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 02:06:43 -0700

Message-Id: <199606060906.CAA11695@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n044

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n044 --------------

 

001 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - Jefferson's analysis! Yum!

002 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - STARZ! "HC" airing

003 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - Amusing "lesbian" photos

004 - "karen mcquillen" <kmcqui - re: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n043

005 - marth@maine.maine.edu (Na - Re: Jefferson's analysis! Yum!

006 - Erica Jamieson <beatles@w - Jefferson's Analysis

007 - Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@ - The handshake

008 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - Jefferson's analysis

009 - RUMerry@aol.com - Re: Jefferson's Analysis

010 - orson@CAM.ORG (Jean Gueri - Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.1 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: Jefferson's analysis! Yum!

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 02:06:39 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 9487

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

Thanks to Jefferson! I feel compelled to add comments..

 

Note to Bao: I have no qualms with 'archiving' these reviews, UNLESS

it's from Starwave or some other (potentially) litigious website which

proclaims on the bottom of every pretentious webpage, "DO NOT DISTRIBUTE

OR MODIFY IN ANY FORM.. LEST WE SUE YOUR ARSES OFF AND RIP EVERY PENNY

FROM YOUR GRITTY LITTLE HANDS..."

 

On with the commentary! I relish the opportunity to engage in this type

of discussion.. especially since I saw "HC" again tonight on Starz! (More

comments in next email..)

 

I'm editing out the portions, such that only that which I am commenting

on is included, to save everyone's valuable time.. :)

 

> --------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n043.2 ---------------

>

> From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

> Subject: A few thoughts

> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 20:34:32 -0400 (EDT)

> MIME-Version: 1.0

> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

>

>[..schnipp!..]

> Paul's stocking: On the surface, Paul doing her stocking as she goes

> outside is simply a sign that she's in a hurry. But there's a sexual

> element to it as well. A mild foreshadowing of the appetite which will

> come to drive Paul in the second half of the film. Of course this also

> ties in with all the walking/feet imagery (Which I still have yet to

> figure out).

 

Yes, there is a focus on walking/feet. Not sure why. (Or maybe the

question we should be asking is, "Why not?")

 

> Visual contrast: Jackson sets Pauline apart from the rest of the group

> beautifully. We immediately know, without anything being said, that

> she's something of an outsider. In the shot of her half-heartedly

> mumbling the hymn, she stands out immediately--a frizzy-haired brunette

> in a sea of carefully beretted blondes. She's also looking in a

> different direction than everyone else, obviously uninterested in the

> proceedings. This apparent lack of interest in conventional religious

> ritual will also find its outlet in her relationship with Juliet, when

> they create a self-deifying religious faith of their own.

 

That is so precisely accurate and correct! The first time I saw this

scene, I was laughing very hard. Jackson -- such a master. And Melanie

Lynskey, she has a gift for making me laugh. I am easily set off! I see

her arched brow, pursed lips, or scrunched nose and I titter endlessly.

 

>

> Juliet's eyebrows: During her theatrical entrance--waiting for Ms.

> Stewart to actually say her name before sweeping into the room--her

> eyebrows are almost contemptuously arched, as if these lowly Kiwi

> students (and teachers) are barely worthy of her gaze. And the Kiwis

> fall right in line--Elizabeth Moody's orgasmic response upon hearing of

> Juliet's background still makes me chuckle. And when Ms. Stewart

> momentarily forgets to mention Juliet's noble homeland ("I am actually

> from England, Ms. Stewart"), we get another haughty little eye lift. All

> this class posturing may be silly, but it will prove tragically important

> to Paul as the film goes on.

>

 

Did you notice as well, when Juliet first walks in (and everyone stands)

something else? Ms. Stewart asks the class to "Sit!" -- and yet, Pauline

remains standing, only her, for at least a second, before sitting down in

perfunctory fashion. Always such a rebel!

 

This is indicated in the FAQ. Also indicated in the FAQ (erroneously)

is that when Pauline hops over the fence, right after having fixed her

stocking, on the way to school, a schoolmate rushes up to her "excitedly"

and they both go off and converse on some topic. Wrong! That is not

Pauline that the schoolmate talks with, but someone else.

 

> Be My Love: Melanie Lynsky's reaction to the opening strains is

> absolutely priceless. It's as if she's never heard music before. But

> then Dad has to screw it all up, first with his Irish joke, and then,

> more seriously, with the fish. Paul's spirit is soaring on waves of

> romantic passion...and then Herb feels compelled to waltz in waving a

> smelly reminder of the family's exceedingly modest means of livelihood.

> Is there anything less romantic than a dead fish?

>

 

One of my favorite scenes. Melanie is so adorable in that scene. Some

have deemed it overacting, but I felt it was quite normal and credible. I

wonder how my face looked in my youth, when I heard a new Led Zeppelin

album? Or something of that nature? Surely not much different than

Melanie's reaction.

 

Herbert and the fish.. what a sense of humor he has! I guess he knew

Pauline was a serious girl, and wished to try to annoy her.

 

> Ilam: The Princess on the bridge (Peter Dasent's musical cue is literally

> called, `The Princess of Ilam.' BTW, if you don't have the soundtrack,

> turn off you computer right now, go to a store and buy/order it). With

> that magnificent track-in on Paul's face when she sees Juliet, we now

> realize the object of Paul's romantic dreams. The film's love story is

> told using the cinematic conventions usually applied to heterosexual

> romances. Romeo has seen the light breaking. Paul is officially smitten.

 

Another favorite scene. When I listen to the soundtrack on the way to

work, I vividly recall this scene when I hear the soundtrack. I see

quite vividly, in my mind's eye, the camera zooming in on Pauline's

enraptured face, upon seeing Juliet on the bridge.

 

Is the CD soundtrack still easily acquired? One person told me in email

that CD Europe no longer can find the disc! I can't believe this. Can

anyone confirm?

 

>[..schnipp!..]

> The Shrine: The atmosphere of this scene, in which Juliet introduces Paul

> to the basic tenets of their alternate religion, is marvelous. Dasent

> takes scraps of melody from the Ilam theme, particularly one three-note

> motif, and alters it, making it odd, haunting, magical, and foreboding

> all at once.

 

Did you notice how Pauline looked at Juliet during that scene? Pay

particular attention: I believe it is on the third saint, when Juliet

says "This." The camera shows Pauline looking at Juliet in what could

only be described as a *very* admiring manner -- almost fanatical! Very

fascinating.

 

> It: Now I'm sure we all know what `It' is. As Juliet runs through the

> other pronouns/saints, Pauline gazes at her in a way that can only be

> described as rather...amorous. And then she makes her first individual

> contribution to their personal mythology--The saint of sex and violence,

> `It.' Juliet isn't ready for `it' yet, but we know that Mr. Welles can't

> be escaped forever.

 

Ahh! I see that you did notice. Good.

 

>

> Meet the Riepers: Despite her best efforts, Paul can't hide her family's

> lower class background from Juliet. Melanie Lynsky looks as if she's

> trying to curl herself into a ball throughout the scene, especially when

> John the idiot boarder starts his tour of the house. And of course

> there's her pitiful attempt to save face after her father reveals his

> job--"He's the manager." More priceless facial expressions.

 

...and of course you did notice "John the Boarder" give Pauline a parting

glance as he left the dining area? Sort of like, "Wow, she's enchanting,

I have to get to know her.." Of course, Pauline is oblivious to his

gaze.

 

>

> The Handshake: when Juliet and Honora meet, Dasent clues us in to the

> coming discord with a little note of dissonance in the midst of his

> otherwise jaunty and playful music for this scene. We realize that

> Juliet and Honora represent forces in Paul's life which can't exist

> harmoniously for too long.

>

 

I am a bit confused by the handshake, not knowing much about "class"

issues. Is this to be interpreted as an insult to Honora -- to shake the

hand of Juliet? Perhaps someone could clear this up for me.

 

> Jumping In: As they run down the dock in their bathing suits, Juliet is

> still the leader, but she isn't willing to take the plunge. Paul,

> however, feels no qualms. Her position as leader in the second half of

> the film is foreshadowed here, along with her willingness to `dive in'

> and experiment with sensual pleasures. Remember where the picture of

> Orson ended up after Juliet discarded it? I don't know, maybe I'm taking

> this Freudian stuff too far.

>

 

Don't you adore Jackson! It is because of his style that we are able to

mention all these issues..

 

> Birth: Note the apparent grimace of strain and effort on Juliet's face

> just before she opens her eyes and sees the Fourth World. It's as if

> she's giving birth to it in her mind. And then it appears. I don't

> think the girls are actually experiencing any kind of mutual

> hallucination, but rather that Jackson is taking us directly into their

> minds to see the world they're jointly imagining. And (New Yorker

> reviews notwithstanding), I think the tactic works. Brilliantly.

> Gloriously. Magnificently.

 

Pauline's performance in this scene is exquisite! From the way she

handles Juliet's legs, as if something really *is* about to emerge, to the

way she squeals, "It's a boy!" and gasps breathlessly -- "Oh!" -- fantastic!

 

>[..schnipp!..]

> ---(That's enough for now. I'll post more later.)---

 

Looking forward to it!

 

see ya,

b

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.2 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: STARZ! "HC" airing

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 02:18:10 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 2388

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

I just watched STARZ!'s broadcast of "Heavenly Creatures." Finally,

they have shown it again. It was first shown in late December, of 1995.

It was where I first saw "HC."

 

The version was prefaced with the comments, "This version has been

modified from the theatrical release: It has been resized to fit your

screen." Or something like that..

 

This version was fantastic! Comments:

 

o The "old man coughing up blood into the bowl" in the hospital

is *in* this version! NOT in the pan/scan or laserdisc releases.

 

In the pan/scan & laserdisc releases, the scene is cut *right before*

the old man coughs up blood into his bowl. WE SEE THE BLOOD

in this version! BTW, I wish to gross Adam out, so I am going to

go into a bit of detail -- some of the blood actually sloshes out

of the bowl, onto the floor!

 

o More of Melanie's bosom can be seen in the scene with "John

the Boarder" (right after he says, "I didn't hurt you, did I?")

 

o More of Juliet's bosom can be seen in one of the bath sequences

(quite surprising, actually!) I believe it's when they are in

the bathroom and Mr. Hulme overhears them talking about "more

cleavage."

 

o Whomever "resized the film to fit your screen" for this version

did a FANTASTIC job. Much of the 'letterbox feel' is there --

you see most of every scene, just like in the laserdisc version!

Melanie isn't cut out of any scene. She's always onscreen when

she should be, just like in the laserdisc (letterbox) format.

 

o Expansion on previous comment: It's like they combined the

nice, zoomed in quality of pan/scan with the detail in the

letterbox versions. A great effort.

 

I felt this version was better than the pan/scan because:

 

o Melanie wasn't chopped off in some scenes

o We actually see *more* of the action! More of the "bottom frame"

or "top frame" is there, it seems they moved the camera back a bit,

so we see more of the peripheral action.

 

I felt this version was better than the letterbox version because:

 

o We see *more* of the action (see above..)

 

I may be able to find out more details later. This is the best version

of "HC" I have seen so far.

 

see ya,

b

 

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.3 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: Amusing "lesbian" photos

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 02:28:56 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 691

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

An associate of mine on the Internet brought this to my attention --

 

Apparently someone else out there has been making "HC" framegrabs!

 

Some 'lesbian' photos from "HC" were posted to the newsgroup

 

alt.binaries.pictures.lesbians

 

I found this fairly entertaining, so I thought I'd make you all aware of

it.

 

I have posted a contact sheet of these postings to an ftp site.

 

Access details:

 

ftp to ftp.best.com, cd to /pub/bryanw/misc, get file abplhc.jpg.

 

see ya,

b

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.4 ---------------

 

From: "karen mcquillen" <kmcquillen@ets.org>

Subject: re: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n043

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 96 11:11:08 EDT

 

Thanks to Jefferson for posting impressions of many HC scenes. Nice to relive

them again.

 

Two of my own thoughts (for now):

 

1) I saw the adjusting of the stocking as Pauline leaves for school as a

foreshadowing of what a stocking is used for later in the film. (20 demerits

to anyone who doesn't know what I'm talking about!!!)

2) Is Bert singing to and waltzing with the mackerel forshadowing of the Red

Herrings that are to come? ;-)

 

 

(Hi Jane!)

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.5 ---------------

 

From: marth@maine.maine.edu (Nancy)

Subject: Re: Jefferson's analysis! Yum!

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 10:02:38 -0700

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

>> The Handshake: when Juliet and Honora meet, Dasent clues us in to the

>> coming discord with a little note of dissonance in the midst of his

>> otherwise jaunty and playful music for this scene. We realize that

>> Juliet and Honora represent forces in Paul's life which can't exist

>> harmoniously for too long.

>>

>

>I am a bit confused by the handshake, not knowing much about "class"

>issues. Is this to be interpreted as an insult to Honora -- to shake the

>hand of Juliet? Perhaps someone could clear this up for me.

 

This scene intrigues me as well. It's really the only scene in the movie

that I can't quite figure out the meaning.

 

I get the impression that Honora is surprised at the extension of Juliet's

hand, a confident action for someone of Juliet's age . I think it also

indicates a distinction between class. Honora can tell by that action that

Juliet comes from a well-bred, upper-class type of family (she seems to

already know this from what Paul has told her about Juliet before the

meeting). Maybe Honora has never met someone so young with such forthright

manners before. Another thing--since Juliet is a guest in Honora's house,

it would have been more appropriate if Honora had extended her hand first.

Maybe she knows this and was caught off-guard by Juliet beating her to it.

Actually, to get technical, is would have been more appropriate for Paul to

introduce Juliet to her mother.

 

Nancy

 

 

========================================

Nancy Marth

Spatial Odyssey

Raymond H. Fogler Library/NCGIA

University of Maine

Tel: 207-581-1634

Fax: 207-581-1653

http://www.odyssey.maine.edu/gisweb

========================================

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.6 ---------------

 

From: Erica Jamieson <beatles@wchat.on.ca>

Subject: Jefferson's Analysis

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 12:35:27 -0700

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Very Perceptive Jefferson!!! :)

 

I'm wondering why during the "Be My Love" and disgusting fish scene, why

does the camera close in on Steve? He looks terrified!

 

Erica

?????????????????????????????

I believe, this is heaven

To no one else but me

And I'll defend it as long as

I can be left here to linger

In silence if I choose to

Would you try to understand

- Sarah

McLachlan

?????????????????????????????

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.7 ---------------

 

From: Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>

Subject: The handshake

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 09:12:25 +0800 (WST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

Hello Creatures,

 

I think the handshake does two things. Firstly, it indicates the class

difference between Honora (and her family, background etc) and Juliet

(ditto), as has been pointed out. Secondly, it foreshadows the scene of

Honora's death - after the first blows knock her to her knees, she

stretches out a hand to Juliet, who at first appears to be responding, but

in fact reaches past her to take the brick from Pauline, and thus take

part in the murder. I find this one of the most terrifying and gripping

moments in the film.

 

(I wondered whether to put a SPOILERS alert at the top of this, but

decided everyone reading this must have seen the film. Correct me if I'm

wrong!).

 

 

Sandra Bowdler

sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.8 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: Jefferson's analysis

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 19:59:16 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

 

I feel like I've just turned the movie off.

 

Handshake - I agree with Sandra that it's foreshadowing, and I think

that Honora also just doesn't like Juliet even before she walks in

the door. She resents Pauline's sudden fascination with an upper-

class girl and her desire to spend so much time at Ilam, because it

makes her feel that the life she's given Pauline isn't enough.

Herbert and the Fish - This is the first example of Pauline's

family getting in the way of her dreams of Juliet. If they won't even

let her listen to a record in peace, then, later on, obviously.....

 

The Feet Thing - I don't think this has any traditional symbolism.

(at least I've never heard of feet symbolizing anything), but I think

Jackson, in his infinite genius, is using this to "ground" the story

and the viewer. By showing us literally and intuitively "where these

characters are", it prepares us for the flights into ecstasy and

madness that they will take. I think a story filled with so much

hysteria really needs to be grounded or else it won't seem believeable.

And what more cinematic way to do this then by showing feet? That's

my meditation on the genius of Jackson for the day.

 

Looking forward to Part II, Jefferson!

 

_ kate

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.9 ---------------

 

From: RUMerry@aol.com

Subject: Re: Jefferson's Analysis

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 02:43:10 -0400

 

Hi all!

 

>I'm wondering why during the "Be My Love" and disgusting fish scene, why

does the camera close in on Steve? He looks terrified!

 

Erica,

 

I too wondered why Steve looked so very anxious in the "Be My Love" scene.

I came up with this:

 

When I first saw it I thought maybe it was just to sustain the dizzying

rollercoaster-like feeling of the movie.

 

Just recently I wondered if Steve might represent the outsider(for example

some people in the audience) who looks at Pauline's extreme intensity and

passion while listening to Mario (and during the episode with her father that

follows) and is shocked and horrified by it. Maybe he further represents the

attitude of any respectable person in a respectable town, repulsion at such a

display of heightened emotion.

 

And maybe he foreshadows our horror as we watch the passions and emotions of

both Pauline and Juliet go spinning out of control.

 

--April Ellis

(closing account

6/6 14:00 EDT, no email after this time)

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n044.10 ---------------

 

From: orson@CAM.ORG (Jean Guerin)

Subject: Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 05:09:04 -0400

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Sounds like full frame version shot! You may have the holy grail!

 

 

E. Jean Guerin

 

Director of Programming

FANT-ASIA Film Festival

Montreal, Canada

 

also: Film Critic (HOUR magazine) & Journalist (Cinefantastique)

Cult/Trash Cinema specialist (CBC-Radio's Brave New Waves)

Actor (_Heavenly Creatures_,_Frankenstein & Me_,_La Vengeance de la

 

Femme en Noir_)

 

The critics rave!

 

"The Most Hideous Man Alive"

-Kate Winslet, Academy Award Nominee

 

"Sexy Demon"

-TIME Magazine.

 

orson@cam.org

http://www.cam.org/~orson/index.html

==============================================================================

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n044 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Fri Jun 7 03:17:20 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA08884 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 03:17:12 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id DAA23902; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 03:00:24 -0700

Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 03:00:24 -0700

Message-Id: <199606071000.DAA23902@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n045

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n045 --------------

 

001 - adamabr@asterix.helix.net - Re: A Few Thoughts/STARZ! "HC" airing

002 - Clscflm@aol.com - Greetings

003 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - Re: Greetings

004 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

005 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - the fish!

006 - adamabr@mail.helix.net (a - Heavenly Creatures - The Montage

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n045.1 ---------------

 

From: adamabr@asterix.helix.net (adam abrams)

Subject: Re: A Few Thoughts/STARZ! "HC" airing

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 02:23:52 -0800

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

"Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org> wrote:

 

>This long, rambling message

>BTW, I'm issuing myself a license to be a bit pretentious

 

Long? Yes...

Rambling, pretentious? _mais non_!

 

Your comments and observations are a delight. I think you have expressed

elegantly a lot of the underlying themes in, and reactions many of us have

had to, the film. I look forward to part 2!

 

>Paul's stocking: On the surface, Paul doing her stocking as she goes

>outside is simply a sign that she's in a hurry. But there's a sexual

>element to it as well. A mild foreshadowing of the appetite which will

>come to drive Paul in the second half of the film. Of course this also

>ties in with all the walking/feet imagery (Which I still have yet to

>figure out).

 

And (perhaps you are going to mention this!) during the sequence where Paul

is doing housework (and glaring at Mother) as we hear her plans for the

"moider", the sequence ends with her doing the laundry, and what is she

taking off the clothesline? Yep... stockings.

 

>Juliet's eyebrows: During her theatrical entrance--waiting for Ms.

>Stewart to actually say her name before sweeping into the room--her

>eyebrows are almost contemptuously arched, as if these lowly Kiwi

>students (and teachers) are barely worthy of her gaze.

 

>From US magazine (Jan. 96):

"People said that Juliet would always arch her eyebrows and look down her

nose at people," says the British actress. "So, they plucked out all mine

from underneath and painted them in on top".

 

>Domestic bliss: More wonderful faces from Ms. Lynsky. We see by her

>expression as Hilda brushes her hair that this is exactly where Paul

>wants to be, and how she wants to live--with the Hulmes, as their

>daughter.

 

And the car ride home always struck me as the most tranquil image of Paul

in the entire film. Not one furrow on her brow; as she leans against Juliet

and stares peacefully into space, she, and Juliet, seem completely at

peace. Probably how I'd look if I'd just been to the 4th world...

 

More please!

 

 

Oh, and Bryan wrote:

 

>BTW, I wish to gross Adam out, so I am going to

> go into a bit of detail -- some of the blood actually sloshes out

>of the bowl, onto the floor!

 

Er, thanks a lot, Bryan... 8^)

 

Adam "Grossed Out But Glad to Know Anyway" Abrams

 

==========================================================================

Only the best people fight against Adam Abrams

all obstacles... in pursuit of happiness! Vancouver, BC, Canada

--Juliet Hulme, "Heavenly Creatures"

Visit the "Fourth World" at http://www.helix.net/~adamabr/creatures.html

==========================================================================

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n045.2 ---------------

 

From: Clscflm@aol.com

Subject: Greetings

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 14:20:14 -0400

 

Hi! Finally getting around to subscribing and wondered how to get digests of

all chat. Thanks in advance.

 

To plunge in - re dead mackeral - always thought wicked sense of Jackson's

humour to introdunce Honora with a shot panning up from the dead fish - talk

about foreshadowing... Can feet and walking and legs have some connection

with seeking a way out, a course, a destiny?

 

"Its all frightfully romantic." ClscFlm

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n045.3 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: Re: Greetings

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 22:11:05 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

 

> Hi! Finally got around to subscribing...

 

Welcome!

 

> To plunge in - re dead mackeral- always thought wicked sense of

> Jackson's humour to introduce Honora with a shot panning up from the

> dead fish - talk about foreshadowing....

 

Did you ever notice also how the opening shot of Henry Hulme also involves

fish? He is shown opening forgotten egg and salmon sandwiches, and doesn't

even know what they are at first. So what a contrast between the two

families already! The Reipers are extremely interested in what they'll eat

in a few hours, and the Hulmes don't even notice food when it's there.

 

 

> Can feet and walking and legs have some connection

> with seeking a way out, a course, a destiny?

 

That makes a lot of sense, and could explain why they use it so

often in the murder scene especially.

> "It's all frightfully romantic."

 

Like heaven, only better because they're aren't any Christians.

 

-- kate

 

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n045.4 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 22:46:01 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 547

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

> From: orson@CAM.ORG (Jean Guerin)

> Subject: Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 05:09:04 -0400

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>

> Sounds like full frame version shot! You may have the holy grail!

>

>

> E. Jean Guerin

>

>[....]

 

Perhaps I've had a taste? I'd love to see the NZ version!

 

b

 

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n045.5 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: the fish!

Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 22:50:53 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 1097

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

> From: Erica Jamieson <beatles@wchat.on.ca>

> Subject: Jefferson's Analysis

> Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 12:35:27 -0700

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>

> Very Perceptive Jefferson!!! :)

>

> I'm wondering why during the "Be My Love" and disgusting fish scene, why

> does the camera close in on Steve? He looks terrified!

>

> Erica

>[....]

 

 

Remember when Herbert first says to Steve, "You're partial to a nice pair

of mackerel, aren't you Steve?"

 

He replies: "Oh, I'm not much of a fish man, Mistah Reeepuhhh."

 

So, he is grossed out, because Herbert is singing to this dead fish!

 

Perhaps he is also shocked to see that Pauline "cut in line" and used the

phonograph before he had a chance to play his Doris Day album.

 

Two emotionally jarring experiences in less than 2 minutes -- enough to

make anyone come undone!

 

Just my warped conception.

 

see ya,

b

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n045.6 ---------------

 

From: adamabr@mail.helix.net (adam abrams)

Subject: Heavenly Creatures - The Montage

Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 00:32:44 -0800

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Greetings all!

 

I'm proud to announce that the Heavenly Creatures Montage is now complete!

 

This artistic creation is culled from twenty-nine separate images from the

film (thanks to Bryan Woodworth's media page!), seamlessly woven together

into a unique neo-psychedelic tapestry of unforgettable imagery. And like

the film, it's chock-full of small details that reward a closer look!

 

And at 640x480 pixels, it also makes a dandy startup screen. For Macs anyway...

 

You'll find it in the Picture Gallery in either wing of my website.

 

Enjoy... "It's for You!"

 

Adam

 

 

I've also added an interesting observation about Anne Perry's "Inspector

Pitt" novels to HeavenlyNews!

 

==========================================================================

Only the best people fight against Adam Abrams

all obstacles... in pursuit of happiness! Vancouver, BC, Canada

--Juliet Hulme, "Heavenly Creatures"

Visit the "Fourth World" at http://www.helix.net/~adamabr/creatures.html

==========================================================================

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n045 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Sat Jun 8 07:00:57 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA24073 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 07:00:47 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id HAA17217; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 07:00:34 -0700

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 07:00:34 -0700

Message-Id: <199606081400.HAA17217@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n046

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n046 --------------

 

001 - Erica Jamieson <beatles@w - Re: the fish!

002 - Clscflm@aol.com - Henry and Herbert

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n046.1 ---------------

 

From: Erica Jamieson <beatles@wchat.on.ca>

Subject: Re: the fish!

Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 06:36:15 -0700

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Bryan wrote:

 

>So, he is grossed out, because Herbert is singing to this dead fish!

>

>Perhaps he is also shocked to see that Pauline "cut in line" and used the

>phonograph before he had a chance to play his Doris Day album.

>

>Two emotionally jarring experiences in less than 2 minutes -- enough to

>make anyone come undone!

Duh! <Bangs head>.

 

Thanx!

 

Erica

?????????????????????????????

I believe, this is heaven

To no one else but me

And I'll defend it as long as

I can be left here to linger

In silence if I choose to

Would you try to understand

- Sarah

McLachlan

?????????????????????????????

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n046.2 ---------------

 

From: Clscflm@aol.com

Subject: Henry and Herbert

Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 15:29:35 -0400

 

Kate writes:

 

>Did you ever notice also how the opening shot of Henry Hulme also involves

>fish? He is shown opening forgotten egg and salmon sandwiches, and doesn't

>even know what they are at first. So what a contrast between the two

>families already! The Reipers are extremely interested in what they'll eat

>in a few hours, and the Hulmes don't even notice food when it's there.

 

True, but also note the look on Henry's face - screwed up - something smells

bad. And isn't he the suspicious one throughout ("She hasn't done anything...

its the intensity that disturbs me..." "I will not stand for any -

hanky-panky.") - who "smells something bad" in the relationship.

 

In the script, btw, Herbert sings to a banana while teasing Paul - and only

uses the dead fish to serenade Honora in the kitchen. Henry's sandwich scene

is also missing and the first reference to him is Hilda pointing out he's

doing his research when Pauline and Juliet rush in after Jon breaks Paul's

Lanza disk. Quite another feel all the way round.

 

ClscFlm

"Its all frightfully romantic."

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n046 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Sat Jun 8 18:23:40 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA18329 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:23:20 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (daemon@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id SAA02696; Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:23:03 -0700

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 18:23:03 -0700

Message-Id: <199606090123.SAA02696@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n047

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n047 --------------

 

001 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Responses to responses

002 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

003 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Jackson's foot fetish

004 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: Jefferson's Analysis

005 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Fish supply

006 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - A few thoughts, part 2

007 - opensesame@earthlink.net - Re: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n046

008 - 9506148v@Magpie.Magill.Un - Peter Jackson Interview

009 - Nancy <marth@maine.maine. - Re: A few thoughts, part 2

010 - Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@ - Re: A few thoughts, part 2

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.1 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Responses to responses

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:24:09 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Wed, 5 Jun 1996, Bryan Woodworth wrote of the 'Be My Love' scene:

 

> One of my favorite scenes. Melanie is so adorable in that scene. Some

> have deemed it overacting, but I felt it was quite normal and credible. I

 

How did the FAQ describe the acting style? "Pitched to the cheap seats"?

Everything about the film's style is a little bit heightened, and I for

one think the acting blends in beautifully. It ain't mimimalist, that's

for sure. The dialogue is also mixed in nice and loud ("I'VE GOT

SCAAAARRSS. THEY'RE ON MY LAWNGS.") Magnificent.

 

> Is the CD soundtrack still easily acquired? One person told me in email

> that CD Europe no longer can find the disc! I can't believe this. Can

> anyone confirm?

 

I don't know about CD Europe, but I didn't have too much trouble getting

it myself. A friend of mine who's a realy soundtrack fanatic ordered it

for me by mail. But then a few days before the disc arrived he informed

me that he'd actually seen the disc on the shelves of a Tower Records.

 

> I am a bit confused by the handshake, not knowing much about "class"

> issues. Is this to be interpreted as an insult to Honora -- to shake the

> hand of Juliet? Perhaps someone could clear this up for me.

 

It might have been considered unusual for a 15 year old girl to shake the

hand of her best friend's mother. I suppose a handshake implies a

certain amount of equality, which would be rather presumptuous of Juliet

in this case. Presumptuous, but certainly not out of character.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.2 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:25:55 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Wed, 5 Jun 1996, Bryan Woodworth wrote:

 

> This version was fantastic!

 

The important question is...Did you tape it? Just curious.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.3 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Jackson's foot fetish

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:35:59 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Wed, 5 Jun 1996, kate ann jacobson wrote:

 

> Jackson, in his infinite genius, is using this to "ground" the story

> and the viewer. By showing us literally and intuitively "where these

> characters are", it prepares us for the flights into ecstasy and

> madness that they will take.

 

Good point. In simplest terms, what is being depicted? Locomotion.

Ambulation. Characters going from one place to another. Leading, following.

 

It could be representing flight, or escape. An effort to get away from

where one has been (or where one has come from), which Paul is certainly

trying to do throughout the film.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.4 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: Jefferson's Analysis

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:40:25 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Thu, 6 Jun 1996 RUMerry@aol.com wrote:

 

> Just recently I wondered if Steve might represent the outsider(for example

> some people in the audience) who looks at Pauline's extreme intensity and

> passion while listening to Mario (and during the episode with her father that

> follows) and is shocked and horrified by it. Maybe he further represents the

> attitude of any respectable person in a respectable town, repulsion at such a

> display of heightened emotion.

 

I agree with this. Steve may like Doris Day, but Paul LOVES Mario. Once

again the "intensity" of the girls' feelings are disturbing the rest of

the general populace. Paul's faces can best be described as orgasmic,

and they simply aren't the kind of faces a proper schoolgirl is supposed

to make. That amount of passion, of burgeoning sexuality, can come to no

good.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.5 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Fish supply

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:56:31 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Thu, 6 Jun 1996, kate ann jacobson wrote:

 

> Did you ever notice also how the opening shot of Henry Hulme also involves

> fish? He is shown opening forgotten egg and salmon sandwiches, and doesn't

> even know what they are at first. So what a contrast between the two

> families already! The Reipers are extremely interested in what they'll eat

> in a few hours, and the Hulmes don't even notice food when it's there.

 

Excellent point. Perhaps heightening the class distinction a bit more.

For the Riepers, give them a couple of fish to fry and it's like

Christmas. The Hulmes are affluent enough to actually lose food and

never give it a second thought.

 

I suppose it also contrasts the two fathers in particular. One's job is

fish supply, and the other is too wrapped up exalted professorial

contemplation to even notice them.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.6 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: A few thoughts, part 2

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 12:03:52 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

Okay, here's the rest.

____________________________

 

The Royal Family: Just as they've created their own heaven and their own

religion, they've also created their own royal family. We see now how

the relationship is beginning to overtly clash with the conventions of

Christchurch. And we see how Paul is changing. Whereas she presumably

rarely spoke in class before, she's now willing to stand up and yell at

the teacher ("It's not rubbish!").

 

TB: When Paul learns of the diagnosis on the phone, her devastation is

presented visually--she's locked in a criss-cross of dark shadows, with a

patch of light illuminating her anguished face. A great shot. This is

their first period of separation, and it will prove rather momentous.

 

Sickness: At the dinner table, Paul shares Juliet's sickly pallor, as if

her wish that she could contract TB as well has somehow been granted. (We

should keep in mind that consumption is the most utterly romantic of all

diseases). Their psychological connection is so intense and powerful at

this point that nothing can ease the pain of being apart.

 

Diello: Significantly, now that society has temporarily pulled them

apart, Paul and Juliet's fantasies take on a decidedly violent and

antisocial bent. Whereas Juliet was content to dismiss Christianity as

`bunkum' before, now she's annoyed by it to the point of aggressive

fantasy. (I love Kate's glare) Diello makes his first corporeal

appearance here, in the first of many instances in which he will murder

anyone who stands between the girls. He's firmly established as a

representative of anarchy, chaos, bloodlust (and just plain lust, for

anyone sharp-eyed enough to recognize his resemblance to `It.' I wasn't,

at first.)

 

John/Nicholas: The loss of Paul's virginity is perhaps my favorite scene

in the film. There's a hell of a lot going on. When we finally see

Borovnia in all its glory, take a close look at the clay the characters

are made of. The upper class glitterati of Borovnia--Mario, Charles,

Diello, Deborah--appear to be made of a brownish, slightly darker clay

than the others. Could this darker clay signify that they're made of

sterner, more valuable stuff than the commoners? And note the level of

detail in the sculpting--Charles et al are finely detailed, but most of

the commoners are rather grotesquely unformed. During the sequence in

which Paul goes after Deborah, John's grunting visage is interspersed

with these hideous faces, linking them together as obstacles separating

Pauline from the true object of her adoration--Deborah/Juliet. The

commoners (and their commonplace, grunting sex) prove not only to be

"dreadfully dull" to Pauline, but an outright irritation. Pauline's

tears and the toilet flushing at the end say it all. She'll never find

happiness this way.

 

The New Juliet: When they are finally reunited, Juliet appears softened,

more feminized, with longer, more voluptuous hair (and less arched

eyebrows). At the risk of sounding sexist, this seems to go hand in hand

with the girls' switched positions in the second half of the film.

Juliet is now officially "the girl" in the relationship, as Paul takes on

a more aggressive leadership position.

 

Do You LIKE your Mother?: The transparent Freudianism of the Doctor

Bennet's question still makes me laugh. If Pauline has somehow failed to

bond with her mother, then that must inevitably lead to...

 

H...H...Homo...: As I mentioned in an earlier post on this mailing list,

this was the first time in my initial viewing of the film that the

thought of the girls' being lesbians actually crossed my mind. I had so

willingly entered into the girls' world that their intimacy never struck

my as odd. But then DeNiro's question to Joe Pesci in `Raging Bull' came

to mind: "What's with all this kissin' on the mouth? Ain't a cheek good

enough for you?" Honora and Henry Hulme had no doubt been asking

themselves the same thing.

 

Portraits of Juliet: Upon reflection, there's something odd about Paul's

drawings of her beloved. Their style seems somewhat simplistic and

cartoonish, as if a younger child had drawn them. They seem especially

strange in light of Paul's deft sketching of horses in Ms. Waller's

class. Did her skill backslide somehow?

 

The Balloon has Gone Up: What does this mean? Somebody please tell me.

 

Paul gets an Idea: The rather grotesque down angle on Paul's face when

she first has the idea of killing mother hearkens back to a similar angle

on Juliet when she imagined the priest's death. Only this time, we know

it's not just a harmless (if somewhat twisted) fantasy. Perhaps

Jackson's decision to remove Paul's visual fantasy of her parent's death

for the American release version has something to do with this. Killing

Honora isn't just a pipe dream. And Paul's mind is turning to the

consideration of concrete plans rather than cathartic fantasies. She's

got to plan an actual murder now.

 

The Loveliest Night: The doors at Ilam seem to open by themselves for

Paul, as if some unseen force is urging her onward. Then Juliet sweeps

down the stairs in evening gown, just like a good paramour should. She's

absolutely stunning_by idealizing and glamorizing Juliet, the filmmakers

cause us to identify even more strongly with Paul's adoration. I mean,

who could blame anybody for falling in love with her, be they man, woman,

or hermaphrodite? I wonder at this point if Juliet is even there at

all. Is this another joint fantasy, like their glimpse of the Fourth

World, or is it simply Paul's vision? Fantasy and reality, now of equal

importance, merge together.

 

Booah!: Nice line reading, Mr. Guerin. This is the moment of reckoning,

when the girls can finally no longer escape `It.' At the end of their

breathless chase, we find that their screams of terror are actually

screams of laughter. Their trepidation eased, they're finally ready to

consummate the relationship. Impulses toward both sex and violence

intermingle freely here, as Diello's dismemberment of some unfortunate

Borovnian is intercut with Pauline's ecstasy. And as the shadow of

Orson's hat resolves itself into Pauline, we finally realize who `It'

really is.

 

Going way, way down: Keep on the lookout for the incredibly boisterous

fellatio one pair of Borovnians is engaged in during the mini-orgy.

They're in the background, and Juliet's face covers them up as she moves

into shot. I'm not going to try to tie this into any of my theories. I

just think it's funny.

 

(It was at this point that my notes became more sparse.)

 

Juliet: Throughout these last scenes, Juliet's attitude toward the coming

murder is elusive. She's obviously more aware of the import of Paul's

plan than Paul is, and seems to know on some instinctive level that this

will signal not only Honora's death, but the death of their relationship

as well. Juliet's farewell to her own mother is especially poignant in

this light--she realizes that her life, her most intimate friendship, and

her family will never be the same again. And yet she seems powerless to

stop the coming events. She hesitates and rationalizes ("She doesn't

appear to bear us any grudge"), but never once does she attempt to steer

Paul onto a different course. Is this loyalty a misguided expression of

love, or a symptom of shared madness?

 

The Aria: Are we expected to believe that Juliet suddenly felt the urge

to go out on her balcony and sing in the middle of a crying jag?

Probably not. So what's happening then? I think it's most likely

another fantasy on Paul's part_when the balcony is revealed on the right

side of the screen, with Paul's brooding face on the left, it's almost as

if the scene is springing from her mind. But if this is Paul's vision,

then why is Juliet crying? The tears make the already poignant love song

come across even more strongly as a lament or a farewell. Could it be

that some part of Paul realizes that the coming events will destroy their

relationship forever? Or perhaps it's not Paul's dream. Perhaps it's

pure aesthetics_a scene with no grounding in the reality of the

narrative, or the characters minds whatsoever. A kind of commentary by

the filmmakers, if you will.

 

Mud: All throughout the film we've seen women walking and running. Now

the film slows down as the girls tramp downhill on a muddy path which

seems to mirror the inescapable track of fate they've put themselves on.

But the girls can't stay out of the mire any more. You almost expect

them to sink right in, as if it were quicksand.

 

The Tree Branch: The very deliberate and enigmatic shot of Juliet

catching herself on the tree branch reminds me of a similar shot earlier

on: When she discovers Hilda and Bill in bed, the camera zooms in to

focus on her hand gripping a banister. On the off chance that this is a

deliberate reference to the earlier scene, both shots would seem to

indicate a loss of balance as Juliet dangles on the precipice of

life-changing events.

 

Death: The murder is another kind of consummation for the girls. It's

the end product of the untenable psychological position Paul found

herself in. In the confrontation between her own dull, dead-end

background (associated with Mother) and the globetrotting, romantic

possibilities of upward mobility (associated with Juliet and her family),

one of them had to give. As Honora dies we see the shipboard dream

transformed into the ultimate nightmare: Separation. Pauline is left on

the dock as an unwilling part of the madding crowd, abandoned forever

among the `dreadfully dull.' To slightly paraphrase Edith Wharton: "You

gave me my first taste of a real life, and now I have to carry on with a

false one." Juliet is gone. Her dreams are gone. In the face of this

kind of desolation, there's only one possible response: screaming. There

is no point in the film continuing. The story (as Jackson and Walsh

chose to tell it) is told.

_________________________________________________________________

 

And that's that. Whew. If you read this far, I hope you got something

out of it. I know I did. I sort of had to write this, sooner or later,

and I'm glad I have a forum in which to post it.

 

I think I'll go back and review the FAQ now (At which point I can

determine what actual percentage of this has already been said.) Adios.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.7 ---------------

 

From: opensesame@earthlink.net (dg acosta)

Subject: Re: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n046

Date: Sat, 08 Jun 1996 19:10:53 GMT

 

cancel please

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.8 ---------------

 

From: 9506148v@Magpie.Magill.UniSA.edu.au

Subject: Peter Jackson Interview

Date: Sun, 09 Jun 1996 05:12:49 +0930

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

 

Hello people. This is an interview with Peter Jackson that was done in

February 1995 after the release of HC in Australia. I copied it off JJJ

radio when it was on, and now I transcribe it in the hope of causing

unlimited happiness in all of you. :-) Dissolve it in a spoon and inject.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

PJ: I mean, I didn't approach Heavenly Creatures with the idea of doing it

in a different style... than my previous films. It was a different subject

matter, sure, which... in a way the subject matter demands a different kind

of approach, but as a film-making style I think it's the same.

 

[Excerpt from the film]

[JH: Your mother is rather a miserable woman, isn't she?]

 

PJ: I think what intrigued me about it is the complexity of the story. It's

actually not a Hollywood story. It's not a case of saying, 'Well, these two

people did this... to this woman... and they were evil, and she was innocent,

and therefore, you know, it's all nice and clean,' or that the mother was

evil and she deserved to get killed by these two girls. I mean it's not kind

of simple. It's a case of trying to humanise a story which has never really

been humanised before, and to explain it in a way that you can see it from

their perspective, but at the same time not condoning it.

 

[Excerpt from the film]

[HH: Your daughter's... an imaginative, and... spirited girl.

HP: Look, if she's spending too much time at your house, you only need to

say.]

 

PJ: You know, I felt a very strong commitment, if you like, a responsibility

to telling this story as accurately as I could. There was no way ever that

I was going to make stuff up, or that, you know, we were going to sort of

change the facts because they'd make a better movie.

 

[Excerpt from the film]

[HH: The thing is...

HP: Yvonne hasn't been herself either, locking herself away in her room,

endlessly writing.

HH: My wife and I feel that the relationship is... unhealthy.]

 

INT: Down to the point where one of the fantasy characters bears a striking

resemblance to Orson Welles?

 

PJ: Well, yeah, I mean, he was Orson Welles. They had a series of matinee

idols that they had named the Saints, and they were usually squeaky clean,

like James Mason and Mario Lanza, they were their heroes, but they had Orson

Welles as an antihero, and they gave him a code name called 'It', and they

never referred to him by his name. They always talked about It, and how

grotesque It was, and how It is the most hideous man who ever lived. There

was a strange ritualistic thing that happened, that a week before they

committed this murder they went to see an Orson Welles film for the very

first time, and they came back to Juliet's house, and they were incredibly

excited and wound up about it, and they were in this kind of exhalted state,

and they did these sort of crazy things until dawn. They didn't get to sleep

until dawn that day. And so it was strange, and that was obviously another

great scene to put in the film.

 

[Excerpt from the film]

[HP: I'm not sure what you mean, Dr Hulme.

HH: Your daughter... appears to have formed... a rather... unwholesome

attachment to Juliet.

JH: Come with me!]

 

PJ: Pauline in her diary wrote fairly explicit chapters about... what was

written as a shared hallucination, and the psychiatrist who interviewed the

two girls afterwards was fascinated by this too, in that they appeared to be

able to fantasise, and to transport themselves into this Paradise, which

they called the Fourth World, more or less at will, and there's certainly an

extract from Pauline's diary which is at Easter, and they're on top of a hill

above a bay where the Fourth World apparently opens up before them, and they

go into it. So I thought, 'This is a great scene to show in the film,' and

it was written as though it actually happened, to both girls at the same

time. One of the things about the relationship in the end that's a slightly

trite, but I think accurate conclusion is that they almost belonged in the

nineties more than the fifties. They had this active imagination, this

disrespect for their teachers. I mean we spoke to fifteen or sixteen of

their classmates, who are now obviously sort of fifty-five year old women,

and they all said that Pauline and Juliet were kind of scary to them, and

that they would never talk back to their teachers, But Pauline and Juliet

would, and they seemed to have no fear of authority. This imagination too,

this love of fantasy and writing about fantasy characters almost seems more

sort of modern. I mean it's something that seems to come more out of

Dungeons and Dragons, I guess, than something you'd imagine from the fifties.

 

INT: How did you direct your two lead actors, because you're asking two quite

young women to go into some very dark places.

 

PJ: It was difficult. Kate Winslet, who plays Juliet, was a trained actress

from London. She had had some experience, and she'd been to drama school. It

was much more difficult for Melanie Lynskey, who we cast out of New Plymouth

in New Zealand, who had never acted in her life before. Melanie bears a lot

of similarities to Pauline, on a sort of surface level. I mean she's

intelligent, she's interested in poetry like Pauline was, she has a sort of

enigma which Pauline had, a very mysterious quality. But what Melanie doesn't

have is Pauline's obsessive sort of darkness, and so we had to ask Melanie

to go into places that she'd never been before, thinking thoughts that she'd

never thought before, and we were lucky because Sarah Pierse who plays her

mother in the film, you know, the central character in the film, Sarah also

agreed to act as Melanie's acting coach. It was very useful in the sense

that they were mother/daughter in the film and they also had this

relationship offscreen.

 

[Excerpt from the film]

[PP: I know what to do about Mother.

JH: Yes.

PP: Some sort of... accident.]

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

That's it. Hope you enjoyed it!

Bye.

 

Shannon <9506148v@magpie.magill.unisa.edu.au>

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.9 ---------------

 

From: Nancy <marth@maine.maine.edu>

Subject: Re: A few thoughts, part 2

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 17:02:23 -0700

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Bravo!! That was fantastic!

 

One more thing: so why do you think Juliet says she's sorry aboard the ship

as the ship departs at the very end: "I'm sorry...I'm so..sorry"

 

Nancy

=========================================================

Nancy Marth

Dept. of Spatial Information Science and Engineering

National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis

University of Maine

250 Boardman Hall

Orono, Maine 04469

Ph: 207-581-2135

http://www.spatial.maine.edu/studentbios/marth/marth.html

 

=========================================================

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.10 ---------------

 

From: Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>

Subject: Re: A few thoughts, part 2

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 09:22:57 +0800 (WST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

Just a minor point Jefferson, and other Creatures,

 

The balloon has gone up: means action/trouble is about to start. It

derives I believe from Napoleon's use of observation balloons in war in

the 1790s.

 

cheers

 

sb

 

sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n047 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Sun Jun 9 20:03:25 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA05475 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 20:03:11 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (daemon@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id UAA11873; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 20:02:54 -0700

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 20:02:54 -0700

Message-Id: <199606100302.UAA11873@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n048

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n048 --------------

 

001 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Sorrow

002 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - "STARZ!" airing / Jefferson comments

003 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: A few thoughts, part 2

004 - Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@ - Re: "STARZ!" airing / Jefferson comments

005 - Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@ - Re: A few thoughts, part 2

006 - Erica Jamieson <beatles@w - Telepathy

007 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: "STARZ!" airing / Jefferson comments

008 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - the balloon has gone up

009 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - Jefferson's thoughts

010 - Nancy Marth <marth@maine. - Shoot...

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.1 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Sorrow

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 02:24:34 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Sat, 8 Jun 1996, Nancy wrote:

 

> Bravo!! That was fantastic!

 

Aw, shucks. Thank you.

> One more thing: so why do you think Juliet says she's sorry aboard the ship

> as the ship departs at the very end: "I'm sorry...I'm so..sorry"

 

Well...One a 'literal' level, she could just be sorry that Paul can't

come with her on the ship. But since the whole scene is metaphorical

rather than literal, I suppose it could be more of an apology for having

given Paul a glimpse of a lifestyle which she could never truly share.

For inadvertently tantalizing her to the point of madness.

 

In other words, "Sorry I complicated your life with romantic visions that

were so much more vivid and interesting than your dull reality that you

basically went crazy and killed your mom." Or something like that.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.2 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: "STARZ!" airing / Jefferson comments

Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 23:23:47 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 13494

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

> --------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.2 ---------------

>

> From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

> Subject: Re: STARZ! "HC" airing

> Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 11:25:55 -0400 (EDT)

> MIME-Version: 1.0

> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

>

> On Wed, 5 Jun 1996, Bryan Woodworth wrote:

>

> > This version was fantastic!

>

> The important question is...Did you tape it? Just curious.

>

 

YES. But, I munged it -- I recorded about 1/2 the intro (you know, the

archival tape with that 'tour of Christchurch') when I realized it was in

SLP mode (my VCR). So I stopped it and put it in SP. Duh!

 

Ok though, it was on again *TONIGHT*! I recorded it in SP mode

throughout. I hope to place more juicy infos online from this version..

 

And now, commentary regarding part two.

Thank you very much, Jefferson.

 

:-)

 

> --------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n047.6 ---------------

>

> From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

> Subject: A few thoughts, part 2

> Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 12:03:52 -0400 (EDT)

> MIME-Version: 1.0

> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

>

>

> Okay, here's the rest.

> ____________________________

>

> The Royal Family: Just as they've created their own heaven and their own

> religion, they've also created their own royal family. We see now how

> the relationship is beginning to overtly clash with the conventions of

> Christchurch. And we see how Paul is changing. Whereas she presumably

> rarely spoke in class before, she's now willing to stand up and yell at

> the teacher ("It's not rubbish!").

>

 

I agree regarding the creation of their own religion. However, I don't

find it very surprising for Pauline to suddenly begin to show some spunk.

I'm sure all of us have experienced moments where we wouldn't do

something alone, but if we are in a group, we do that very thing --

especially in certain circumstances.

 

By this point, Pauline had invested lots in the relationship, including

her thoughts and feelings in the form of a story. For the teacher to

call it rubbish is surely something to spark the ire of any budding

novelist..

 

> TB: When Paul learns of the diagnosis on the phone, her devastation is

> presented visually--she's locked in a criss-cross of dark shadows, with a

> patch of light illuminating her anguished face. A great shot. This is

> their first period of separation, and it will prove rather momentous.

 

It is also the first time we see the colour GREEN. Pay particular

attention to the background lighting -- it's green!!

 

The color green seems to be popular in this movie. cf.: (not in order)

o Pauline in the bath ("Yes, Yes!")

o in bed with John the Boarder

o When lying back on her bed, shown overhead, while we hear

voiceover of "Mother has made the most terrible threat now.."

Right after the visit to the "doctor."

o In the scenes around the house, when trying to elude Orson!

o .. and also when they "make love to the saints"

o During the night, when they are stealing things ("They'll

blame the housekeeper!")

o During the night, when Juliet catches Hilda and Bill Perry in

bed

o During the scene in the bath, when Pauline says to Juliet,

"I'm going with you." To which Juliet replies, "Yes."

o When Pauline has her "brainwave," and we see her first begin

to write to Juliet

.. probably a few other scenes as well.

 

>

> Sickness: At the dinner table, Paul shares Juliet's sickly pallor, as if

> her wish that she could contract TB as well has somehow been granted. (We

> should keep in mind that consumption is the most utterly romantic of all

> diseases). Their psychological connection is so intense and powerful at

> this point that nothing can ease the pain of being apart.

>

 

Quite correct. Indeed, Pauline wishes so dearly to be with her companion

that she even goes to the point of scribbling in her diary, right before

Honora comes to her room to trouble her to eat something, "It would be

wonderful if I could get tuberculosis too," (words to that effect).

 

>{...schnipp!!!...}

> John/Nicholas: The loss of Paul's virginity is perhaps my favorite scene

> in the film. There's a hell of a lot going on. When we finally see

> Borovnia in all its glory, take a close look at the clay the characters

> are made of. The upper class glitterati of Borovnia--Mario, Charles,

> Diello, Deborah--appear to be made of a brownish, slightly darker clay

> than the others. Could this darker clay signify that they're made of

> sterner, more valuable stuff than the commoners? And note the level of

> detail in the sculpting--Charles et al are finely detailed, but most of

> the commoners are rather grotesquely unformed. During the sequence in

> which Paul goes after Deborah, John's grunting visage is interspersed

> with these hideous faces, linking them together as obstacles separating

> Pauline from the true object of her adoration--Deborah/Juliet. The

> commoners (and their commonplace, grunting sex) prove not only to be

> "dreadfully dull" to Pauline, but an outright irritation. Pauline's

> tears and the toilet flushing at the end say it all. She'll never find

> happiness this way.

 

And did you notice, first Juliet appears as clay -- a few Borovnian

commoners mask our glimpse of Juliet ("Deborah") - then she appears

as her true self, and turns her head with beaming gaze towards Pauline.

 

>

> The New Juliet: When they are finally reunited, Juliet appears softened,

> more feminized, with longer, more voluptuous hair (and less arched

> eyebrows). At the risk of sounding sexist, this seems to go hand in hand

> with the girls' switched positions in the second half of the film.

> Juliet is now officially "the girl" in the relationship, as Paul takes on

> a more aggressive leadership position.

 

I have to take exception to the description here.. Juliet is the "girl"?

Ewwww. :-) Hmm, well.. please forgive me..

 

>

> Do You LIKE your Mother?: The transparent Freudianism of the Doctor

> Bennet's question still makes me laugh. If Pauline has somehow failed to

> bond with her mother, then that must inevitably lead to...

>

 

You can tell the "doctor" is fishing.. When his initial questions fail to

bear fruit ("Do you enjoy your studies? Are you happy at home?") he goes

for the ones which are most blatant and obvious.

 

> H...H...Homo...: As I mentioned in an earlier post on this mailing list,

> this was the first time in my initial viewing of the film that the

> thought of the girls' being lesbians actually crossed my mind. I had so

> willingly entered into the girls' world that their intimacy never struck

> my as odd. But then DeNiro's question to Joe Pesci in `Raging Bull' came

> to mind: "What's with all this kissin' on the mouth? Ain't a cheek good

> enough for you?" Honora and Henry Hulme had no doubt been asking

> themselves the same thing.

>

 

For me, I caught onto the potential lesbian (or at the very least, *VERY*

intense) relationship after the kiss between Juliet and Pauline on the

grass, after they had danced in the woods and fallen down, fatigued.

 

After that scene, my sensibilities were hopelessly manipulated by

Jackson's masterful direction (and the glorious script). I think I was

fooled by nearly every red herring!

 

>{...schnipp!...}

> Paul gets an Idea: The rather grotesque down angle on Paul's face when

> she first has the idea of killing mother hearkens back to a similar angle

> on Juliet when she imagined the priest's death. Only this time, we know

> it's not just a harmless (if somewhat twisted) fantasy. Perhaps

> Jackson's decision to remove Paul's visual fantasy of her parent's death

> for the American release version has something to do with this. Killing

> Honora isn't just a pipe dream. And Paul's mind is turning to the

> consideration of concrete plans rather than cathartic fantasies. She's

> got to plan an actual murder now.

 

The way Pauline's head jerks and twitches, as if she is consumed with rage

and fury at her mother, is deftly conveyed by Melanie Lynskey. Very

powerful scene. I was mesmerized by that scene. It is amazing what can

be conveyed with a mere glance..

 

> Juliet: Throughout these last scenes, Juliet's attitude toward the coming

> murder is elusive. She's obviously more aware of the import of Paul's

> plan than Paul is, and seems to know on some instinctive level that this

> will signal not only Honora's death, but the death of their relationship

> as well. Juliet's farewell to her own mother is especially poignant in

> this light--she realizes that her life, her most intimate friendship, and

> her family will never be the same again. And yet she seems powerless to

> stop the coming events. She hesitates and rationalizes ("She doesn't

> appear to bear us any grudge"), but never once does she attempt to steer

> Paul onto a different course. Is this loyalty a misguided expression of

> love, or a symptom of shared madness?

 

I really don't see how Juliet could know at this point that "...her life,

her most intimate friendship, and her family will never be the same

again." We have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. I'm sure

she had no idea, but perhaps she did possess an inkling?

 

This part of the film is most unconvincing.. I have doubts as to how much

is based on fact, and how much is very masterful scripting (fiction) on

the part of Jackson and Walsh. (In fact, I wonder that about the whole

movie, of course.)

 

When I say "unconvincing," (poor choice of word) I mean that I am not

completely sure I believe this actually occurred.. could it be fiction?

Is it based on fact? Perhaps from a diary entry? Hmm..

 

>

> The Aria: Are we expected to believe that Juliet suddenly felt the urge

> to go out on her balcony and sing in the middle of a crying jag?

> Probably not. So what's happening then? I think it's most likely

> another fantasy on Paul's part_when the balcony is revealed on the right

> side of the screen, with Paul's brooding face on the left, it's almost as

> if the scene is springing from her mind. But if this is Paul's vision,

> then why is Juliet crying? The tears make the already poignant love song

> come across even more strongly as a lament or a farewell. Could it be

> that some part of Paul realizes that the coming events will destroy their

> relationship forever? Or perhaps it's not Paul's dream. Perhaps it's

> pure aesthetics_a scene with no grounding in the reality of the

> narrative, or the characters minds whatsoever. A kind of commentary by

> the filmmakers, if you will.

 

Agreed, pure commentary by the filmmakers. A poignant scene, but who

knows what the relevance is. Yet, it is very powerful! We are

manipulated again by Jackson and Walsh. (And, I do enjoy it..) :-)

 

>{...schnipp!...}

> The Tree Branch: The very deliberate and enigmatic shot of Juliet

> catching herself on the tree branch reminds me of a similar shot earlier

> on: When she discovers Hilda and Bill in bed, the camera zooms in to

> focus on her hand gripping a banister. On the off chance that this is a

> deliberate reference to the earlier scene, both shots would seem to

> indicate a loss of balance as Juliet dangles on the precipice of

> life-changing events.

 

Great point.

 

> Death: The murder is another kind of consummation for the girls. It's

> the end product of the untenable psychological position Paul found

> herself in. In the confrontation between her own dull, dead-end

> background (associated with Mother) and the globetrotting, romantic

> possibilities of upward mobility (associated with Juliet and her family),

> one of them had to give. As Honora dies we see the shipboard dream

> transformed into the ultimate nightmare: Separation. Pauline is left on

> the dock as an unwilling part of the madding crowd, abandoned forever

> among the `dreadfully dull.' To slightly paraphrase Edith Wharton: "You

> gave me my first taste of a real life, and now I have to carry on with a

> false one." Juliet is gone. Her dreams are gone. In the face of this

> kind of desolation, there's only one possible response: screaming. There

> is no point in the film continuing. The story (as Jackson and Walsh

> chose to tell it) is told.

> _________________________________________________________________

 

When I first saw this movie (yea, verily, quite a while ago now.. I'm

amazed there is still stuff to discuss!) I was shocked that the

movie ended at this point. I guess I was expecting Jackson to show us

some 10 minute court trial or something.. I was just stunned. It was a

very rude way to end this movie .. it just STOPS! Quite shocking.. And,

in retrospect, masterfully compelling and effective.

 

>

> And that's that. Whew. If you read this far, I hope you got something

> out of it. I know I did. I sort of had to write this, sooner or later,

> and I'm glad I have a forum in which to post it.

>

 

I am very pleased to have been able to read this! Thanks very much.

 

> I think I'll go back and review the FAQ now (At which point I can

> determine what actual percentage of this has already been said.) Adios.

>

 

I still haven't finished the FAQ.. (version 2.0, anyway!).

 

I think that's enough for this message!

b

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.3 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: A few thoughts, part 2

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 02:28:38 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Sun, 9 Jun 1996, Sandra Bowdler wrote:

 

> The balloon has gone up: means action/trouble is about to start. It

> derives I believe from Napoleon's use of observation balloons in war in

> the 1790s.

 

Cool. I was actually using it correctly then. I've been using the

phrase as a kind-of substitute for "The shit's hitting the fan."

 

Does anyone know if this was a common expression in New Zealand or

England at the time? Did Jackson and Walsh put it in of their own

volition, or did the phrase perhaps appear in one of the court transcripts?

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.4 ---------------

 

From: Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>

Subject: Re: "STARZ!" airing / Jefferson comments

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 14:44:58 +0800 (WST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

Hello all,

 

Another small point: after the real life murder, Juliet Hulme was

reported as saying "The day we killed her I think she knew beforehand what

was going to happen and she didn't seem to bear any grudge". This is

clearly the basis for Juliet's movie dialogue in Pauline's bedroom.

 

cheers

sb

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.5 ---------------

 

From: Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>

Subject: Re: A few thoughts, part 2

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 14:54:47 +0800 (WST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

 

On Sun, 9 Jun 1996, Jefferson F. Morris wrote:

 

>

> Does anyone know if this was a common expression in New Zealand or

> England at the time? Did Jackson and Walsh put it in of their own

> volition, or did the phrase perhaps appear in one of the court transcripts?

>

 

Well, it's not uncommon in Australia, although it has rather an old

fashioned ring about it. The phrase does not appear in Pauline's diary in

her account of this incident, although otherwise the movie version seems

pretty much an accurate rendition.

 

cheers

sb

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.6 ---------------

 

From: Erica Jamieson <beatles@wchat.on.ca>

Subject: Telepathy

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 09:42:06 -0700

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

I was watching HC this morning again, and I noticed something: In the shrine

scene when they're naming the saints, after every name Juliet gives them,

Pauline repeats it with rapture. But after Juliet throws away "It" and grabs

Paul's hands she says, "We give praise, to the Saints". She pauses and

Pauline looks at her in awe and instead of repeating "Saints", Juliet

whispers it, as if reading Pauline's mind. Is this possible or am I just

reaching?

 

Bye!

 

Erica

?????????????????????????????

I believe, this is heaven

To no one else but me

And I'll defend it as long as

I can be left here to linger

In silence if I choose to

Would you try to understand

- Sarah

McLachlan

?????????????????????????????

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.7 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: "STARZ!" airing / Jefferson comments

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 21:41:23 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Sat, 8 Jun 1996, Bryan Woodworth wrote:

 

> And did you notice, first Juliet appears as clay -- a few Borovnian

> commoners mask our glimpse of Juliet ("Deborah") - then she appears

> as her true self, and turns her head with beaming gaze towards Pauline.

 

How could I miss it? It's one of my favorite things in the film.

"You're crying. Don't be sad, Gina." I get goosebumps. There's

something heartbreaking about it.

 

> > The New Juliet: When they are finally reunited, Juliet appears softened,

> > more feminized, with longer, more voluptuous hair (and less arched

> > eyebrows). At the risk of sounding sexist, this seems to go hand in hand

> > with the girls' switched positions in the second half of the film.

> > Juliet is now officially "the girl" in the relationship, as Paul takes on

> > a more aggressive leadership position.

>

> I have to take exception to the description here.. Juliet is the "girl"?

> Ewwww. :-) Hmm, well.. please forgive me..

 

Uh oh. I'm certainly not questioning anyone's masculinity, or Ms. Lynsky's

adorableness. I'm speaking purely in terms of the respective positions

they seem to be taking in the relationship.

 

> For me, I caught onto the potential lesbian (or at the very least, *VERY*

> intense) relationship after the kiss between Juliet and Pauline on the

> grass, after they had danced in the woods and fallen down, fatigued.

 

Yeah. Maybe I had an inkling at that point, but I was too caught up in

everything to worry about it.

 

> The way Pauline's head jerks and twitches, as if she is consumed with rage

> and fury at her mother, is deftly conveyed by Melanie Lynskey. Very

> powerful scene. I was mesmerized by that scene. It is amazing what can

> be conveyed with a mere glance..

 

And a fish-eyed lens, which they appear to be using for that close-up.

 

> I really don't see how Juliet could know at this point that "...her life,

> her most intimate friendship, and her family will never be the same

> again." We have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. I'm sure

> she had no idea, but perhaps she did possess an inkling?

 

Well, she knew that Paul was planning to kill her mother, and that if she

succeeded and they were caught, that she'd be an accessory at least.

That has to be a bit of a weight on your mind. Ms. Winslet conveys Juliet's

dread marvelously.

 

> When I say "unconvincing," (poor choice of word) I mean that I am not

> completely sure I believe this actually occurred.. could it be fiction?

> Is it based on fact? Perhaps from a diary entry? Hmm..

 

Who knows? In my analyses I really don't worry about the real life case,

and I'm not even really that interested in it, except insofar as it can

throw new light on the film. What can I say? I love the movie.

 

> When I first saw this movie (yea, verily, quite a while ago now.. I'm

> amazed there is still stuff to discuss!) I was shocked that the

> movie ended at this point. I guess I was expecting Jackson to show us

> some 10 minute court trial or something.. I was just stunned. It was a

> very rude way to end this movie .. it just STOPS! Quite shocking.. And,

> in retrospect, masterfully compelling and effective.

 

For me, when I first saw it, the ending had that powerful feeling of

completeness and inevitability that you get with great tragedy. The

feeling that it couldn't have ended any other way.

 

One of the many cool things about HC is the fact that Jackson and Walsh

could have chosen to tell this story in a much more conventional way.

The first half could have detailed the relationship, then the second half

would have taken place in the courtroom, and detailed the scandal that

surrounded the case. Most filmmakers would have considered this material

to be a more likely source for drama. And in fact I'm sure you could

make a very compelling film out of it, with the case's celebrity status

echoing films like 'Badlands' or 'Natural Born Killers.' But of course,

that's not what J&W chose to do.

 

They chose to immerse you in the girls' world, to make you see the case

from the inside out. I'm reminded of Faulkner's 'Light in August,' in

which we find out in the beginning that a murder has occurred, and

everyone in town has their own fairly simple take on it. But then the

rest of the book presents us with the full story, and we realize that the

reality of it is much more complicated than anyone realizes. The crime is

not excused (just as it's not excused in HC), but it is explained.

 

Of course, J&W were able to very economically reduce the rest of the

story to just a few simple lines of text. "It was a condition of their

release that they never meet again." That one line does all the work,

and it's like an emotional punch in the stomach.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.8 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: the balloon has gone up

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 20:18:53 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

Sandra wrote:

 

> The phrase does not appear in Pauline's diary in

> her account of this incident, although otherwise the movie

> version seems pretty much an accurate rendition

 

Actually, the movie version is very accurate! Though Pauline wrote

in her diary that Juliet said something else on that fateful night,

Hilda Hulme testified in court that her daughter did, in fact, barge

in on her and Bill Perry and utter my favorite HC phrase, "The balloon

has gone up!"

--- kate

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.9 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: Jefferson's thoughts

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 20:03:46 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

Thanks again for that adrenaline rush of HC !!!!

 

Juliet:

 

> Throughout the last scenes, Juliet's attitude toward the coming

> murder is elusive. She's obviously more aware of the import of

> Paul's plan than Paul is, and seems to know on some instinctive

> level that this will signal not only Honora's death, but the death

> of their relationship as well. Juliet's farewell to her own mother

> is especially poignant in this light -- she realizes that her life,

> her most intimate friendship, and her family will never be the

> same again. And yet she seems powerless to stop the coming events.

> She hesitates and rationalizes ( "She doesn't appear to bear us

> any grudge"), but never once ddoes she attempt to steer Paul onto

> another course. Is this loyalty to a misguided expression of love,

> or a symptom of shared madness?

 

 

I don't think this is shared madness, because at this point in the movie

the girls have never seemed more " seperate". In Paul's bedroom on the

day of the murder, the girls talk *at* each other and not *to* each

other. They're on completely different strains. ( "Your mother is rather

a miserable woman, isn't she?"...."I thought for hours about whether

Carmelita should accept Bernard's marriage proposal..." ) In the tearoom,

Paul stares almost exclusively at her mother and ignores Juliet's anxiety,

which she used to be so sensitive to. When Juliet hesitates to drop the

gemstone, Paul looks at her hostilly for the first time in the movie.

 

Paul, in other words, has gone "past the point of no return", and Juliet

knows it, but still loves her friend. As for Miss Hulme's motives

for going along with it and not stopping Paul, Anne Perry said that "it

was a matter of honor. I knew one of them had to die. I wanted to help

Pauline." ( I guess she meant Pauline was thinking of suicide ) I think

this loyal reluctance fits well with Kate Winslet's performance in the

last scenes.

 

Tree Branch: Juliet's last desperate cling to reality?

 

The Aria:

 

> But if this is Paul's vision,

> then why is Juliet crying? The tears make the already poignant

> love song come across even more strongly as a lament or a farewell.

> Could it be that some part of Paul realizes that the coming

> events will desrtroy their relationship forever? Or perhaps

> it's not Paul's dream. Perhaps it's pure aesthetics - a scene

> with nogrounding in the reality of the narrative, or the

> characters' minds whatsoever. A kind of commentary by the

> filmmakers if you will.

 

 

If I have a favorite scene in HC, this is it. I think it's one of those

scenes that can mean a different thing to every person who sees it.

For me, it's the heart's desire, and Juliet is crying not with sadness,

but with perfect love ("deep and infinite as the sea") Running onto a

boat with the Hulme's is a continuation of this - perfect belonging.

I always try to talk myself out of this, but I think this is what Paul

killed for. ( Maybe that's why they showed it so late in the movie? )

 

 

-- kate

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n048.10 ---------------

 

From: Nancy Marth <marth@maine.maine.edu>

Subject: Shoot...

Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 20:02:51 -0700

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

...Why don't we all get together somewhere in the US (or elsewhere..NZ,

maybe??) and watch numerous screenings of HC?! That would be a heck of a lot

of fun. We could do an HC convention!

 

(Pardon my burst of excitement)

 

Nancy

 

PS--Hey, if anyone on this list lives in Maine, let's meet somewhere and do

a state-wide screening! I think I'm up to about 25 for the number of times

I've watched this movie. I love reading the analysis from different

perspectives on this list--makes me go back and re-evaluate certain scenes.

=========================================================

Nancy Marth

Dept. of Spatial Information Science and Engineering

National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis

University of Maine

250 Boardman Hall

Orono, Maine 04469

Ph: 207-581-2135

http://www.spatial.maine.edu/studentbios/marth/marth.html

 

=========================================================

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n048 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Tue Jun 11 03:46:47 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA09031 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 03:46:36 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (daemon@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id DAA01557; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 03:46:19 -0700

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 03:46:19 -0700

Message-Id: <199606111046.DAA01557@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n049

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n049 --------------

 

001 - adamabr@mail.helix.net (a - Another Brick in the FAQ

002 - danny g acosta <opensesam - Re: Digest heavenly-CANCEL

003 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - Re:Telepathy

004 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - HeavenlyWeb updates!

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n049.1 ---------------

 

From: adamabr@mail.helix.net (adam abrams)

Subject: Another Brick in the FAQ

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 03:31:09 -0800

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Hi all,

 

Just a quick note to announce that the "Frame-o-Rama", 2.0 section of my

website is near completion... I have added sections 5 and 6. One to go and

it'll all be there!

 

 

==========================================================================

Only the best people fight against Adam Abrams

all obstacles... in pursuit of happiness! Vancouver, BC, Canada

--Juliet Hulme, "Heavenly Creatures"

Visit the "Fourth World" at http://www.helix.net/~adamabr/creatures.html

==========================================================================

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n049.2 ---------------

 

From: danny g acosta <opensesame@earthlink.net>

Subject: Re: Digest heavenly-CANCEL

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 12:08:13 -0700

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

please take me off the list...thank you

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n049.3 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: Re:Telepathy

Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 16:53:41 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

On June 9, Erica wrote:

 

> But after Juliet throws away "It" and grabs Paul's hand she

> says, "We give praise, to the Saints". She pauses and Pauline

> looks at her in awe and instead of repeating "Saints", Juliet

> whispers it, as if reading Pauline's mind. Is this possible or

> am I just reaching?

 

I always just thought Juliet was saying it twice, to emphasize it. But

now I'm thinking of the line later in the movie, remember, when they're

dancing on The Loveliest Night, and Paul says,"We have realized why Deborah

and I have such extraordinary telepathy, and why people treat us and look

at us the way they do." The Saints thing could be the first example of

this in the movie. Eerie.........

-- kate

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n049.4 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: HeavenlyWeb updates!

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 03:45:47 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 330

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

Lots of juicy stuff coming up in the next week or two to HeavenlyWeb!

New drawings and more media.. :-)

 

b

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n049 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Wed Jun 12 20:22:31 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA02189 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 20:01:30 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id TAA24553; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 19:00:27 -0700

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 19:00:27 -0700

Message-Id: <199606130200.TAA24553@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n050

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n050 --------------

 

001 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - Updates!

002 - "karen mcquillen" <kmcqui - A Herring by Any Other Name...

003 - GorillaBlu@aol.com - Might be of some interest...

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n050.1 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: Updates!

Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 17:16:12 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 296

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

Exciting things added to HeavenlyWeb; come have a look!

URL below :-)

 

b

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n050.2 ---------------

 

From: "karen mcquillen" <kmcquillen@ets.org>

Subject: A Herring by Any Other Name...

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 9:56:15 EDT

 

Not to open a kettle of fish ;-), but is anyone out there bothered/annoyed

that Peter Jackson made a movie about two young women that most everyone will

admit *looks* like a lesbian relationship on the surface, only to have Peter

say, "It's a Red Herring". Or are most people OK with this and think it's

part of Peter's genius?

 

Does anyone think it might be homophobic to deny there is an underlying

sexual tension between Pauline and Juliet. And if you say you admit there is

sexual tension/attraction, but it's not lesbian, I'd ask you to consult your

dictionary under "L".

 

Sure, this brings up the issue of what is a lesbian, but then what's not a

lesbian?

 

Do people feel better that Peter says it's *not* about lesbians? Breathe a

sigh of relief, as it were?

 

Did anyone consider that Peter's Red Herring comment might be a Red Herring

itself?

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n050.3 ---------------

 

From: GorillaBlu@aol.com

Subject: Might be of some interest...

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 20:11:27 -0400

 

Hi all! As I have posted before, I have gotten the

autographs of a few people from the movie and I

also collect autographs for fun. I helped a club

create a "Heavenly Creatures" address list, and I

thought you might find this little ad interesting:

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hello from The Dotted Line! We are a pen pal club

dedicated to the hobby of collecting entertainment

autographs through the mail. We have a bi-monthly

newsletter which goes out to our members and a

feature in our July/August edition may be of some

interest to your group.

 

Included in the upcoming newsletter is a Heavenly

Creatures Address List, featuring addresses for

several of the key-players in the film, including

Kate Winslet, Melanie Lynskey, Peter Jackson,

Fran Walsh and real-life Heavenly Creature, Anne

Perry.

 

As a fan of the film, I am also including a special

address list available ONLY upon request - a

compilation of addresses important ONLY to

a true HC fan. This list will be included if you

clearly mark your request: "HC Address List".

 

Get both the July/August Dotted Line newsletter

AND special HC Address List for ONLY $3 (US

funds only) OR ten (10) un-used US $.32 stamps!

 

Orders may be sent to:

 

HC Address List

c/o The Dotted Line

PO Box 753515

Memphis, TN 38175-3515

 

For more information, please email us at:

DottedLyne@aol.com

 

Thanks!

Your friends at The Dotted Line

 

PS - We are interested in trading our list for un-used

foreign stamps also, (especially from England). Please

email if interested.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

I am a member of The Dotted Line and they are very nice

people. The woman who runs it is a BIG HC fan!

 

I hope the list is helpful for you as well!

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n050 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Thu Jun 13 20:08:02 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA11367 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 20:07:54 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id UAA03664; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 20:02:28 -0700

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 20:02:28 -0700

Message-Id: <199606140302.UAA03664@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n051

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n051 --------------

 

001 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: Jefferson's thoughts

002 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - A Mackerel by any other name

003 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - lesbians

004 - michaela drapes <oleanna@ - Re: A Herring by Any Other Name...

005 - Clscflm@aol.com - herrings by any other name...

006 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - The Red Herring ( Mackeral, whatever)

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n051.1 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: Jefferson's thoughts

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 22:05:14 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Sun, 9 Jun 1996, kate ann jacobson wrote:

 

> I don't think this is shared madness, because at this point in the movie

> the girls have never seemed more " seperate". In Paul's bedroom on the

> day of the murder, the girls talk *at* each other and not *to* each

> other. They're on completely different strains.

 

Excellent point. The girls are quite distanced from each other, with

Juliet sweating and worrying about the murder, and Paul more or less lost

in her own world.

 

> When Juliet hesitates to drop the

> gemstone, Paul looks at her hostilly for the first time in the movie.

 

I'd say it's maybe more frustration than hostility. To me, her look

says, "Come on, dammit. It's too late to back out now." Juliet's

expression, on the other hand, is one of sadness. She's already

regretting what's about to happen.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n051.2 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: A Mackerel by any other name

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 22:17:50 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, karen mcquillen wrote:

 

> Not to open a kettle of fish ;-), but is anyone out there bothered/annoyed

> that Peter Jackson made a movie about two young women that most everyone will

> admit *looks* like a lesbian relationship on the surface, only to have Peter

> say, "It's a Red Herring". Or are most people OK with this and think it's

> part of Peter's genius?

 

Well, you've got to ask yourself, in regards to what is it a red

herring? I think he meant that if you're trying to find a single

explanation for Honora's murder (in the context of this film),

homosexuality isn't it. I think he's trying to prevent viewers from

drawing the conclusion that the girls committed murder simple because they

were insane lesbians and that's what insane lesbians do.

> Does anyone think it might be homophobic to deny there is an underlying

> sexual tension between Pauline and Juliet.

 

Not homophobic. Just somewhat blind. I don't think anyone on this list

has denied that the girls were sexually interested in one another. They

did sleep together, after all.

 

> Sure, this brings up the issue of what is a lesbian, but then what's not a

> lesbian?

 

Well, people have asked Ann Perry if she is/was a lesbian, and she has

always replied negatively. I wouldn't classify a woman who had one

homosexual flirtation/involvement in her youth as a lesbian. One of my

best friends had a lesbian experience recently, but ended up hating it,

and certainly wouldn't classify herself as a lesbian, seeing as how all

the rest of her relationships have been with males.

True, the girls claimed lesbianism as part of their insanity defense, but

that was, as far as I know, just a legal tactic.

 

> Do people feel better that Peter says it's *not* about lesbians? Breathe a

> sigh of relief, as it were?

 

I can't speak for 'people,' but I really don't care one way or the other.

 

--Jefferson

 

P.S. On an unrelated note (except insofar as it still relates to HC), I'd

like to congratulate Adam on his very fine HC collage. Quite a piece of

work. Check it out on his Fourth World homepage if you haven't already.

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n051.3 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: lesbians

Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 23:49:36 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 2549

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

> --------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n050.2 ---------------

>

> From: "karen mcquillen" <kmcquillen@ets.org>

> Subject: A Herring by Any Other Name...

> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 9:56:15 EDT

>

> Not to open a kettle of fish ;-), but is anyone out there bothered/annoyed

> that Peter Jackson made a movie about two young women that most everyone will

> admit *looks* like a lesbian relationship on the surface, only to have Peter

> say, "It's a Red Herring". Or are most people OK with this and think it's

> part of Peter's genius?

 

I think it's part of Peter's genius.

 

When you have had access to all the information he and Fran had access

to, it would be difficult to determine how to portray the relationship.

 

For all we know, Pauline could have had a slightly skewed interpretation

of her reality. Yet, the fact that Honora and Henry Hulme (et al.)

wished to "sever" the relationship tends to add weight to the argument

that, at the very least, outsiders perceived the relationship to be

somewhat outside the norm.

 

>

> Does anyone think it might be homophobic to deny there is an underlying

> sexual tension between Pauline and Juliet. And if you say you admit there is

> sexual tension/attraction, but it's not lesbian, I'd ask you to consult your

> dictionary under "L".

>

> Sure, this brings up the issue of what is a lesbian, but then what's not a

> lesbian?

>

> Do people feel better that Peter says it's *not* about lesbians? Breathe a

> sigh of relief, as it were?

>

> Did anyone consider that Peter's Red Herring comment might be a Red Herring

> itself?

>

 

I'm going to bypass those interesting questions (which are difficult to

answer) and take the easy way out: I am going to provide my

interpretation of the relationship.

 

I feel that while some of the elements of the relationship between Pauline

and Juliet (as depicted in the movie) seem patently lesbian, there is

really no easy way to define their relationship. I doubt that even

Pauline and Juliet *knew* of the term 'lesbian' or what it meant to 'be

lesbian.' I just accept their relationship as intense, meaningful, and

very spirited. :-)

 

I'm not very satisfied by that paragraph. But, I really don't wish to

open the can of worms on this issue. I'll let someone else take the

initiative.

 

b

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel,

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryan woodworth

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 bryanw@borovnia.666.org

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n051.4 ---------------

 

From: michaela drapes <oleanna@mail.utexas.edu>

Subject: Re: A Herring by Any Other Name...

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 02:16:23 -0600

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Must reply to this one...

 

Personal theory time... (:

 

Ok, I always thought that Jackson called the girls' lesbianism a red herring

so it wouldn't overpower the rest of the story. When it really comes down

to it, that's really not the main focus of the film. If you want a

'lesbian' flick, go watch Go Fish, or Salmonberries, or Claire of the Moon

or something. HC is so much more than just a 'lesbian' film...I don't think

I need to explain in too much depth, as I'm sure everyone here has seen it

*multiple* times. But just to clarify, I do admit that, as a bisexual

woman, before my first viewing HC did appeal to me on a superficial level as

a sympathetic and non-judgemental portayal of an exceptionally close female

relationship. But I was thrilled to find when I saw the film to find that

it did deal with so much more--all consuming imagination, family crisis,

adolescent turmoil, intense friendship that turns into a love

unequalled--see what I mean? I really think that Jackson de-emphasized the

use of generalizing labels (ie, saying, "Now, this here is a movie about

lesbians") because the girls' relationship was so incredibly unique. I

believe he didn't want us, the viewers, to be constrained by thinking of the

relationship in terms of this or that, gay or straight, but just as first

and foremost, one of love.

 

>Not to open a kettle of fish ;-), but is anyone out there bothered/annoyed

>that Peter Jackson made a movie about two young women that most everyone will

>admit *looks* like a lesbian relationship on the surface, only to have Peter

>say, "It's a Red Herring". Or are most people OK with this and think it's

>part of Peter's genius?

 

see above... (:

 

>Does anyone think it might be homophobic to deny there is an underlying

>sexual tension between Pauline and Juliet. And if you say you admit there is

>sexual tension/attraction, but it's not lesbian, I'd ask you to consult your

>dictionary under "L".

 

Homophobia? Come on! If Jackson was homophobic, he wouldn't have made the

film, or he wouldn't have put the 'Night with the Saints' sequence in. If

anything, Jackson's done the gay community a great service by not being

judgemental towards the girls.

 

>Sure, this brings up the issue of what is a lesbian, but then what's not a

>lesbian?

 

In my case, that's a little too personal to discuss in this venue.

 

>Do people feel better that Peter says it's *not* about lesbians? Breathe a

>sigh of relief, as it were?

 

Why...? Because now it fits in the 'mainstream'? Because it makes it more

'comfortable'? Need I point out that the film as a whole is about

matricide, a *crime*--one that is socially unacceptable on all

fronts--despite how much we sympathize with the perpetrators? That's

definately not a mainstream or comfortable topic. Is Jackson streamlining

that for general public consumption too? I should think not... Something

tells me that Jackson isn't into watering down controversial issues. (:

 

>Did anyone consider that Peter's Red Herring comment might be a Red Herring

>itself?

 

Good point...that could very well be... (:

 

regards,

michaela

--

Michaela R. Drapes

oleanna@mail.utexas.edu

NEW URL! http://www2.cibola.net/~michaela

"You've got to measure your life with love" -Rent

--

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n051.5 ---------------

 

From: Clscflm@aol.com

Subject: herrings by any other name...

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 19:05:43 -0400

 

Karen brings up significant questions about reading the relationship between

Pauline and Juliet. Reading some of the last few digests (as I'm new!), I'm

taken aback by people who've screened the film saying they never thought

"anything" about the girls' relationship until some overt event (the kiss in

the forest, rolling about in bed etc.). People will only see what they want

to see and then will still usually interpret it in a way that satisfies their

life view. Sure it means how you define the "L" word, most people don't even

want to consider it, much less grapple with any specific definition. They

overlook, ignore or call it something else (a phase, something - anything -

else). Question: if this was two boys, what would people have thought of the

kissing, hugging and rolling around? Why is it different with girls?

 

It doesn't seem anyone on the list cares to discuss real events, but I shall

proceed at any rate for the one or two who might. People are incredibly

inculturated to respond to certain things in certain ways, so much so that

even the participants of anything remotely homosexual may themselves refuse

to identify with that definition (moreso in the repressive 50s, double that

in 50s Christchurch). Hulme flat out seemed amazed they could be thought of

as having any kind of sexual relations as "we're both girls" (and modern day

Perry is infuriated most over HC's implication of lesbianism). You can go

back a few hundred years or look out the window and ask someone on the street

and get that one. According to that line, sex cannot exist without a man

around (so then why do people worry when two women _are_ rolling about

together?). Parker was only quoted as saying "Juliet is not a friend, she is

much more closer." (Dr.:) "Isn't that love?" "I don't know. I care for her

more than anyone else in the world." A goodly number of people would say

that right there was "lesbian." Then you get "phases" and all the rest.

 

Why does it really matter if they did or didn't have any detailed physical

relationship? How many people would you kill for? I think that says it all.

 

Jackson's comment is a bit of a herring - as his construction of Paul and

Juliet's relationship is so heavily romanticized. But I also think he and

Fran Walsh realize people's realtionships are never cut and dry, never easy

to pigeonhole, much less really understand.

 

Just my 2, well, maybe 10 cents.

 

ClscFlm

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n051.6 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: The Red Herring ( Mackeral, whatever)

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 18:06:21 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

 

> Jackson's comment is a bit of a herring - as his construction of

> Paul and Juliet's relationship is so heavily romanticized. But

> I also think he and Fran Walsh realize people's relationships

> are never cut and dry, never easy to pigeonhole, much less really

> understood?

 

 

Yes!!!!

 

With that in mind, may I add something else ? I think the better a movie

is, the more it stands completelely on it's own as a work of art, and

the less it needs remarks by anyone, even the director, to qualify it,

or help the audience understand what to think of it. Peter and Fran's

true beliefs and feelings are in the film itself, the film they worked

so hard on for all those months, and not in things they say or don't say

in interviews. Films speak so much more loudly than words. I decided

on my own what to think of Paul and Julie's romantic relationship in HC,

and I thank Peter and Fran for giving me that gift of choice. Even if Peter

went on David Letterman and said "you know, those girls were really stark-

raving lunatics", nothing about HC would ever change for me.

 

( pardon me while I burst into song now )

 

 

-- kate

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n051 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Sat Jun 15 22:04:44 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA05713 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 22:04:41 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id WAA04219; Sat, 15 Jun 1996 22:04:17 -0700

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 22:04:17 -0700

Message-Id: <199606160504.WAA04219@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n052

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

 

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n052 --------------

 

001 - GorillaBlu@aol.com - Anne Perry sample

002 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Boys vs. Girls

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n052.1 ---------------

 

From: GorillaBlu@aol.com

Subject: Anne Perry sample

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 00:22:04 -0400

 

If you've not read an Anne Perry novel but are curious, there is a

sample chapter on-line @:

 

http://www.randomhouse.com/BB/mystery/cainhisbrother.html

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n052.2 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Boys vs. Girls

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 01:29:23 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Thu, 13 Jun 1996 Clscflm@aol.com wrote:

 

> Question: if this was two boys, what would people have thought of the

> kissing, hugging and rolling around? Why is it different with girls?

 

Speaking personally, I must admit I probably would have been somewhat

repelled if it had been two guys. Chalk this up to my sexual

preference. I certainly wouldn't have turned the movie

off (I know many who would), but it would have taken a lot more getting

used to. But I wouldn't have been able to enter into the thing

emotionally in the way that I did. Why? Simple. Paul is in love with

a beautiful girl. I can relate to that, therefore I can empathize with

the main character, and that's critical in the enjoyment of any story.

 

Of course, girls are allowed more physical intimacy with each

other before people start whispering about lesbianism. They're not as

strictured as boys in that regard. Indeed, if HC had been about two

boys, there's no doubt that the parents (and Christchurch society in

general) would have taken notice much more quickly, and taken more drastic

action to terminate the relationship.

 

And (to get very blunt), male society doesn't frown too much on a bit of

lesbianism here or there, in terms of its voyeuristic erotic appeal. It's a

regular feature in pornography targeted towards heterosexual males.

 

> Why does it really matter if they did or didn't have any detailed physical

> relationship? How many people would you kill for? I think that says it all.

 

Good point, although I don't think Paul is really killing for Juliet, or

even killing to stay with her. I think she's killing for a variety of

reasons, and this probably ties back into Jackson's 'red herring' remark.

 

Then again...Juliet is killing for Paul, in a way. Or seems to be. Dunno.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n052 ---------------

 

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA10816 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 14:05:37 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (daemon@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id NAA17724; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:48:52 -0700

Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:48:52 -0700

Message-Id: <199606182048.NAA17724@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n053

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n053 --------------

 

001 - Jane <misc1341@cantva.can - Red Herrings

002 - Jane <misc1341@cantva.can - Girls vs Boys

003 - adamabr@mail.helix.net (a - The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n053.1 ---------------

 

From: Jane <misc1341@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz>

Subject: Red Herrings

Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 08:26:11 +1300

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

 

Karen's recent posting, which speculated whether or not Juliet and

Pauline - as they are constructed in Heavenly Creatures - had a

lesbian relationship, has generated some interesting and revealing

(intended or not) comments. My turn now - read on if you dare :-)

 

I think that often, when discussing sexual identity people impose

boundaries and definitions which tend to be not nearly as fixed as

we might prefer. For myself, there is little doubt that the energy

which flowed between the two was, in part, sexual. I am also of the

opinion that the film depicted some behaviours which may be

interpreted as lesbian. (Nothing like stating the obvious) Whether

this means they 'were lesbians' or not, may be a different matter

entirely.

 

The construction of lesbian identity is a social thing - it is not

some pre-ordained given and I think, the ambiguity of what/who 'a

lesbian' is well caught within the film. Peter Jackson's comments

about Red Herrings (which are actually blue down here at the moment

as its winter and rather cold) would seem to me, to be a move against

the stereotypical categorisation and ownership of Pauline and

Juliet's sexual expressions. It might be useful to digress into

'reality' for a bit. For example, in her paper Heavenly

Lesbians: A Murder Revisited Alison Laurie writes,

 

My interest is in the public portrayal of lesbians in a discourse

which connects lesbians and murder, sex and death, and portrayals of

the two girls involved in this particular killing as either "mad" or

"bad".

 

Laurie's analysis is problematic because she works from the

assumption that Juliet and Pauline *were* lesbians. This assumption

is repeated throughout the article. Laurie imposes a fixed

definition on the behaviour of the girls, that does not appear to

rest easily on the construction of Pauline and Juliet in Heavenly

Creatures.

 

My point in referring to Laurie's paper is connected to what I said

previously about sexuality not necessarily being a fixed and convient

commodity. I think that it is equally problematic to categorically

claim that Pauline and Juliet, as they are represented in the film,

cannot be partially understood through their sexual expressions of

love for each other. I suspect, that red herring or not, that is why

Peter and Fran included the sex scenes in the film.

 

That's my contribution! Any thoughts on the fact that herrings are

only made red by virtue of tomatoe sauce?

 

Jane

_...._

/ \

/ o __ o \

( \/ )

) (

( - - - )

( )

( )

------------------/l\ /l\-------------------

------------------------------------------

( )

( __ _)

 

'Jackson's unique craft, combined with his acceptance of

the unaltered, unglossed Kiwi environment, makes him

literally unique in the world, possibly the galaxy. I

wonder what he tastes like?' (Chris Hegan, The Listener)

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n053.2 ---------------

 

From: Jane <misc1341@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz>

Subject: Girls vs Boys

Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 08:26:10 +1300

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

 

Hi folks,

 

Just wanted to respond to Jefferson's latest posting. It raised some

interesting issues which are worth considering.

 

> Of course, girls are allowed more physical intimacy with each

> other before people start whispering about lesbianism.

 

I'm not sure of your point here - people (in my opinion) seldom

whisper about lesbianism. It is - in conservative New Zealand at any rate -

talked about loudly. Often with fear, hostility and stereotype. As

the internation press creature evidenced in the 1950's.

That is, again in my opinion, why HC makes such an important

statement about romance between two young women. I think that there

are *many* facets to the relationship between Juliet and Pauline, as

it is constructed in the film. Certainly, most of their interactions

are not explicitly sexual, but I would argue that their interactions

are throughout, shrouded in romance. In 'reality' this was enough to

rouse more than a few *shouts* of lesbianism in the 1950's.

 

Indeed, if HC had been about two

> boys, there's no doubt that the parents (and Christchurch society in

> general) would have taken notice much more quickly, and taken more drastic

> action to terminate the relationship.

 

I can't quite see where this observation comes from Jefferson. It's

certainly not the case in present day Christchurch.

 

> And (to get very blunt), male society doesn't frown too much on a bit of

> lesbianism here or there, in terms of its voyeuristic erotic appeal. It's a

> regular feature in pornography targeted towards heterosexual males.

 

Which is exactly what Alison Laurie, in her article Heavenly

Lesbians: A Murder Re-Visited argues. Laurie heavily critiques the

film for this. She states,

 

In the next scene "Pauline" and "Juliet" are shown riding their

bicycles into the country where a car runs them off the road.

"Pauline" is portrayed as pretending to be hurt, after which the

girls are exhibited as inexplicably running and screaming and tossing

off their clothes. They are shown as frenetically dancing and singing

through the bush until they emerge at a field where they encounter

the male gaze of a conveniently placed fencer. They are depicted as

retreating back to the bush where they lie down in a glade and kiss,

ending a sequence of scenes disturbingly reminiscent of

"lesbian" plots in a pornographic genre produced for male consumers.

Personally I find this reading of the film extremely problematic.

It negates the position of the female viewer and prioritises the

lesbian sexuality of the girls which it claims to critique. It gives

a lot of power to the apparently non-existent Red Herrings :-)

Either there *is* a component of lesbian behaviour in the film or

there isn't. To acknowledge that there is, is not necessarily to

impose a fixed judgement of 'lesbian' on Juliet and Pauline, it is I

think, merely acknowledging the complexity and totality of their

commitment to each other. But to imply that it is present for the

'male consumer' seems to me, to be a superficial reading of the film.

 

Anyway - that's it, a few thoughts for just now

 

 

Jane

_...._

/ \

/ o __ o \

( \/ )

) (

( - - - )

( )

( )

------------------/l\ /l\-------------------

------------------------------------------

( )

( __ _)

 

'Jackson's unique craft, combined with his acceptance of

the unaltered, unglossed Kiwi environment, makes him

literally unique in the world, possibly the galaxy. I

wonder what he tastes like?' (Chris Hegan, The Listener)

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n053.3 ---------------

 

From: adamabr@mail.helix.net (adam abrams)

Subject: The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 13:49:25 -0800

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Well, the good news is: a magazine called "Internet Underground" gave my HC

Website 5 stars and a mention in their magazine!

 

I raced to my local newsstand and confirmed that it does indeed exist.

There was a glowing review. Then I discovered...

 

The bad news! They gave the wrong URL for my site - it links to some guy's

gallery of B&W photos. The first image is an arty shot of a female nude

poised on one of those balance-beams that dancers practice on. Hmmm. Talk

about giving people the wrong idea. It and the rest are all nice photos,

but it sure ain't the _Heavenly Creatures Webpage_!

 

Ah, well, at least they got my email address right.

 

--Adam

 

==========================================================================

Only the best people fight against Adam Abrams

all obstacles... in pursuit of happiness! Vancouver, BC, Canada

--Juliet Hulme, "Heavenly Creatures"

Visit the "Fourth World" at http://www.helix.net/~adamabr/creatures.html

==========================================================================

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n053 ---------------

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA04033 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 18:38:09 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id PAA04915; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 15:43:24 -0700

Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 15:43:24 -0700

Message-Id: <199606192243.PAA04915@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n054

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n054 --------------

 

001 - "Chris Black" <qleap@inte - Re: The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

002 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - Re: The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

003 - Kaiser Wilhelm <delirium@ - Re: The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n054.1 ---------------

 

From: "Chris Black" <qleap@interl.net>

Subject: Re: The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 16:34:04 +0000

 

 

Adam,

 

I already alerted Internet Underground to the error, and they said

they would print a retraction in the next issue. :-)

 

--Chris

 

NP: "Pieces of You" --Jewel

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n054.2 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: Re: The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 19:23:40 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

 

Hi Adam/ All,

 

> The first image is an arty shot of a female nude

> poised on one of those balance-beams that dancers practice on.

 

So that was Hilda Hulme's "deep therapy". I always wondered.

 

( By the way, congratulations, Adam! )

 

-- kate

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n054.3 ---------------

 

From: Kaiser Wilhelm <delirium@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>

Subject: Re: The Two-Edged Sword of Publicity

Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 14:43:45 +1000 (AEST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

> ( By the way, congratulations, Adam! )

 

Indeed. It's a damn fine page. All congratulations.

 

>

>

 

And in the mist there she rides,

And castles are burning in my heart.

http://ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au/~delirium

"I've developed a taste for geeks"

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n054 ---------------

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA22975 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Thu, 20 Jun 1996 23:01:14 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id XAA19688; Thu, 20 Jun 1996 23:00:28 -0700

Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 23:00:28 -0700

Message-Id: <199606210600.XAA19688@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n055

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n055 --------------

 

001 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: Girls vs Boys

002 - michaela drapes <oleanna@ - The Frighteners tidbit

003 - edinman@felix.TECLink.Net - HC prints

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n055.1 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: Girls vs Boys

Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 01:35:40 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Tue, 18 Jun 1996, Jane wrote:

 

> > Of course, girls are allowed more physical intimacy with each

> > other before people start whispering about lesbianism.

>

> I'm not sure of your point here - people (in my opinion) seldom

> whisper about lesbianism. It is - in conservative New Zealand at any rate -

> talked about loudly. Often with fear, hostility and stereotype.

 

Well, I don't know what the social climate of New Zealand is like. My

point was that, for example, if two girls kiss each other on the lips, as

long as they don't linger too long, people won't really think anything of

it. If two males engage in this behavior...eyebrows go up real fast. At

least in America. The standards are different.

 

> Indeed, if HC had been about two

> > boys, there's no doubt that the parents (and Christchurch society in

> > general) would have taken notice much more quickly, and taken more drastic

> > action to terminate the relationship.

>

> I can't quite see where this observation comes from Jefferson. It's

> certainly not the case in present day Christchurch.

 

Perhaps not. But in America, it is my opinion that male homosexuality is

considered a more offensive and egregious aberration than

lesbianism, basically because heterosexual males find it more repugnant

than lesbian activity. Sounds like we're peering at each other from across

a cultural divide.

> > And (to get very blunt), male society doesn't frown too much on a bit of

> > lesbianism here or there, in terms of its voyeuristic erotic appeal. It's a

> > regular feature in pornography targeted towards heterosexual males.

>

> Which is exactly what Alison Laurie, in her article Heavenly

> Lesbians: A Murder Re-Visited argues. Laurie heavily critiques the

> film for this.

 

Well, although I certainly disagree with Laurie's overall assessment of

the film (A perfect example of how someone can miss the point of a work

of art if they apply a socio-political litmus test to it), I think she

may be onto something there. As a male viewer, I found some of

interaction between Paul and Juliet titillating. I won't deny that. But

that's probably just an inevitable by-product of the films' narrative

tactic--to bring us completely inside the world of the girls. To them,

their encounters were exciting and erotic, and therefore Jackson works to

convey that excitement, that giddiness, to the audience. Just as he

works to contrarily show how disappointing Paul's encounter with John is.

(The crying, the sounds of urination and flushing toilets).

 

I imagine Laurie doesn't believe that any heterosexual male could present

a lesbian story without it being in some way 'exploitative.' And her

definition of exploitation is most likely, "Any depiction of a female which

straight males might derive enjoyment from." When this

logic is carried out to its fullest extent, one has to conclude that Kate

Winslet is exploited in the film by virtue of the fact that she's

depicted as an object of sexual/romantic adoration, with Paul filling in

as the traditional male paramour. Indeed, any girl who puts on make-up

and stands in front of a camera is being 'exploited.' A rather limiting

view, I think.

 

> Personally I find this reading of the film extremely problematic.

> It negates the position of the female viewer and prioritises the

> lesbian sexuality of the girls which it claims to critique. It gives

> a lot of power to the apparently non-existent Red Herrings :-)

 

I agree. Laurie chose to classify the film as a 'movie about lesbians

directed by a heterosexual male.' Her entire critique flows from

this classification, an authorical situation she obviously considers to be

inherently problematic. Imagine how different her assessment

of the film might be if she had been told that a woman had directed it.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n055.2 ---------------

 

From: michaela drapes <oleanna@mail.utexas.edu>

Subject: The Frighteners tidbit

Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 12:12:03 -0600

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

The Frighteners

US Release date July 19

Michael J. Fox, Trini Alvorado, Jeffery Combs, Dee Wallace-Stone

Written By Walsh and Jackson, Directed by Jackson (Universal)

 

Peter Jackson's much anticipated follow-up to his sublime adolescent freak

show "Heavenly Creatures" inhabits neat-o alternative realities. Here

Michael J Fox plays a small-town ghost buster who enlists his phantasmal

friends--a judge, a geek, and a disco king--to help him rid a house of some

ectoplasm with attitude. Jacksons spins a whimsical baroque style into a

visual-effects field day to conjure up his creepy poltergeists. He ain't

afraid of no ghost.

 

Premiere, July 1996, pp 14-15

--

 

Michaela R. Drapes

oleanna@mail.utexas.edu

NEW URL! http://www2.cibola.net/~michaela

"You've got to measure your life with love" -Rent

--

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n055.3 ---------------

 

From: edinman@felix.TECLink.Net (edinman)

Subject: HC prints

Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 13:31:36 -0500

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

If anyone is interested in renting 16mm or 35mm prints of Heavenly

Creatures they're available from Swank (starting at about $175 I think,

depending on the use) and can be used as part of a film series, midnight

movies, or whatever.

Their phone number is 314-289-2192 or toll free in most U.S. areas at

800-876-5577.

If you need a projector, 16mm models can be rented in most areas for $30 or

less or if you want to buy one they often trade for $80 or less. I'd be

willing to help anyone find one who is interested--just e-mail me.

I have collected lots of old cult films in 16mm and also shoot and process

my own short films with an antique camera. Always glad to hear from anyone

interested in this sort of thing.

I'm sort of new to this list. Most of my opinions about Heavenly Creatures

are probably not as well thought out as some of the authors I've read here,

but it's nice to know others enjoyed the film as much as I did and feel so

passionately ablut it.--Ed

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n055 ---------------

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Sat Jun 22 02:00:43 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA19813 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 02:00:37 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA26508; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 01:00:30 -0700

Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 01:00:30 -0700

Message-Id: <199606220800.BAA26508@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n056

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n056 --------------

 

001 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - late night HC thoughts

002 - Donald Chin <donaldc@nets - Australian HC...

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n056.1 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: late night HC thoughts

Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 01:10:14 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

This evening I had a brainwave ( after watching HC ) - to write down

some thoughts I had, like Jefferson did. I'm just an amateur, though, a

Jefferson wannabe if you will, so don't expect anything quite so

insightful. But anyway, I'll take a whack at it ( er, pardon the

expression ).

Jonsy's Disappearing Act : Does anyone else think it's kind of creepy

that Jonathan is never seen or mentioned again after Port Levy, even

peripherally? For all the movie implies, Hilda could have drown him when

they went to the shops. The obvious explanation for this is that the movie

told from the girls' point of view, and he's not a part of their world,

so why show him? This is true. But why then do Hilda and Henry never

mention him? I think this could work on two levels. Realistically, they

are neglective parents. But intuitively, Jonsy's disappearance shows

something else. He is the only literal child in a movie about matricide.

His sudden vanishing, around the time of the birth of Diello, could

represent the innocence that has been lost in Paul and Juliet's fantasy

games. Also, the almost denial of his existence sets the mood at Ilam for

the seriousness of what's to come.

 

The Two Christmases : Do you get the feeling that Mr. Jackson is not a

"tidings of comfort and joy" kind of guy ? He seems to be really making

fun of the Christmas holiday, saying that less complicated people can be

thrilled with dumb golden trinkets and socks, but people with Pauline's

depth don't enjoy it at all, either smirking ( the first year ), or

being downright miserable ( the second ). I think it's ironic and

fitting that Pauline gets diaries both years, for they separate her, at

least in writing, from the dull life of her family. One of my favorite

"Pauline Reiper Moments" in this movie is when she gives her sister a

Mario Lanza record.....Gee, I wonder why ?

 

Pauline's Hair : Frizzy at the beginning, straight at the end. Hmmm.

I assume the Reiper's couldn't afford to give her a perm, so I guess this

is naturally curly hair gone straight. Since this is a little unlikely,

I thought maybe the filmmakers were trying to show her hair growing longer

over time, without her having to wear a wig. This could be, but now I

think the straitness symbolizes her inner life, too, because after she

drops out of school, it gets straighter and wilder with her darkening

nature. On the morning of the murder, it is still a _little_ curly, but

once they get to Victoria Park, straight as a board, for the first time

in the movie.

 

Ax : Paul walks up the stairs thinking, "I am trying to think of some

way." Next shot - an ax cutting wood in half. Could this, uh, be the way?

 

Shipboard Fantasy : I think this is commonly thought of as Paul's

fantasy, of running on board with the Hulmes, and longing to be one of

them. It is, of course, but I also think it's Juliet's. What little family

life this girl ever had was completely falling apart, first with Bill

Perry moving in, and then with her parents announcing their divorce. She

as much as Paul wanted a family to belong to.

 

Well, that's all. Sorry if I said anything too obvious.

 

"It all began so well, but what an end...."

 

-Cole Porter

============================================================================

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n056.2 ---------------

 

From: Donald Chin <donaldc@netspace.net.au>

Subject: Australian HC...

Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 00:19:14 +1000

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Hi all,

 

Listmembers living in Australia may be interested to know that Heavenly

Creatures will be showing on Optus Vision next month! It should be

interesting to see what version they give us.

 

Regards, Donald

 

--

Donald Chin <donaldc@netspace.net.au>

"Lost somewhere in Australia...

and fanatical about Heavenly Creatures and Jane Austen!"

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n056 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com Sun Jun 23 18:02:15 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA09471 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 18:02:07 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id RAA29501; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 17:00:27 -0700

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 17:00:27 -0700

Message-Id: <199606240000.RAA29501@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n057

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n057 --------------

 

001 - Clscflm@aol.com - music

002 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - E non ho amato mai tanto la vita!

003 - Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@ - Re: E non ho amato mai tanto la vita!

004 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: late night HC thoughts

005 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: The Frighteners tidbit

006 - mailcall <mailcall@kiva.n - Re: late night hc thoughts

007 - "Chris Black" <qleap@inte - Re: late night HC thoughts

008 - michaela drapes <oleanna@ - Re: The Frighteners tidbit

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.1 ---------------

 

From: Clscflm@aol.com

Subject: music

Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 19:41:03 -0400

 

I still haven't figured out how to get past digests - any kind soul out there

care to offer some assistance?

 

Sorry if this has been brought up in the past, but my radio tells me it's the

100th anniversary of the debut of Giacomo Puccini's La Boheme, which of

course brings HC very much to mind (Sono andati?... Sei il amor - e tutta la

mia vita). I've always thought Jackson's application of prerecorded music

one of the most brilliant aspects of the film. The selections so well

parallel not only mood, but narrative and are built in to the actual script.

Pauline's diary mentions Tosca (and Lanza's Donkey Serenade) specifically,

but I wonder what guided the other inspired operatic choices. Pauline listens

to a segment of Puccini's Tosca, which is a story that, in part, features a

murder that will supposedly free an imprisoned lover - but that backfires and

ends in the demise of the couple... Juliet's aria from La Boheme is a love

song sung by a young woman with TB to her lover who doesn't fully realize she

is dying and really saying goodbye (ah opera!)... And that mesmerizing

Humming Chorus, from Puccini's Madame Butterfly, as Butterfly looks hopefully

to the day to bring romantic fullfillment, not bitterness and death. Nice

stuff... and so wonderfully melodramatic while sincerely romantic and tragic.

 

The rationale for the particular Lanza material is pretty self evident, but

I've always especially liked The Loveliest Night of the Year as its also the

tune circus high wire acts often use... another deliciously striking

metaphor for Pauline and Juliet about to take a leap into space (dare I

finish the thought? -without a net).

 

Do others out there get as bowled over (every time) by the music - or is it

just me?

 

Reflecting and humming along,

ClscFlm

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.2 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: E non ho amato mai tanto la vita!

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 12:35:10 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Sat, 22 Jun 1996 Clscflm@aol.com wrote:

 

> I've always thought Jackson's application of prerecorded music

> one of the most brilliant aspects of the film.

 

Absolutely. In my book, he put himself up there with Kubrick and

Scorsese in terms of musical choices when he did this film.

 

> The selections so well

> parallel not only mood, but narrative and are built in to the actual script.

 

I especially like the parallel (pointed out in the FAQ) between the

first piece of music ('Just a Closer Walk with Thee') and the last

('You'll never walk alone.') Apart from tying into all that walking

imagery, it also puts a heartbreakingly tragic/ironic spin on the end.

The hymn is addressed to Jesus (another 'Heavenly Creature', I suppose),

but it can also be interpreted as a mutual plea between the girls.

Although I suppose it fits Paul's perspective a bit better, especially in

the beginning of the film. She does tend to see Juliet in a rather

angelic light.

When I first saw the film, 'You'll never walk' was already a favorite

song of mine, and I was immediately struck by what a perfect choice it

was. The song would seem to contradict the literal events of the story,

in that Paul and Juliet will have to 'walk alone' for the rest of their

lives (with respect to each other), but the song itself is more an

exhortation for self-reliance ('Walk on with hope in your heart and

you'll never walk alone...'). I suppose it's a self-reliance that the

girls will now have to learn, whether they want to or not. The irony is

still there however, in that it's a somewhat bittersweet but still

hopeful song to play over the credits of a film that ends so desolately.

 

> Do others out there get as bowled over (every time) by the music - or is it

> just me?

 

It ain't just you. I hope you've bought the soundtrack.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.3 ---------------

 

From: Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>

Subject: Re: E non ho amato mai tanto la vita!

Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 00:45:20 +0800 (WST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

rz

**

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.4 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: late night HC thoughts

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 12:52:28 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Fri, 21 Jun 1996, kate ann jacobson wrote:

 

> Jonsy's Disappearing Act : Does anyone else think it's kind of creepy

> that Jonathan is never seen or mentioned again after Port Levy, even

> peripherally? For all the movie implies, Hilda could have drown him when

> they went to the shops.

 

I hadn't thought of this. Jonsy is the only boy the girls ever interract

with (unless you count John/Nicholas), and they seem to be able to

tolerate him well enough. I suppose he could be seen as a stand-in for

young male society--a society the girls aren't really all that interested

in. In fact, like the rest of the world, Jonsy has a tendency to try to

screw up their dreams, whether he's jumping out of the bushes and

breaking the Mario record, or destroying their sand castle.

 

(Incidentally, it's always puzzled me why the girls laugh when Jonsy

destroys their castle. I would've beaten the crap out of him. I guess

they were just to happy to care.)

 

If Jonsy is meant to be a figurative example of how society will intrude

on the girls' world, his disappearance starts to make a little more

sense. He's the first to intrude (admittedly in a fairly harmless way),

then he's replaced by John (who comes between them a bit more directly),

and then John disappears, to be replaced by the most powerful of the male

figures--Henry Hulme. Notice how almost immediately after Nicholas is

dispatched, Henry is finally introduced as the main antagonist. The

bliss of the girls' reunion is short-lived.

 

> The Two Christmases : Do you get the feeling that Mr. Jackson is not a

> "tidings of comfort and joy" kind of guy ? He seems to be really making

> fun of the Christmas holiday, saying that less complicated people can be

> thrilled with dumb golden trinkets and socks, but people with Pauline's

> depth don't enjoy it at all, either smirking ( the first year ), or

> being downright miserable ( the second ).

 

I didn't interpret her reaction at the first Christmas as a smirk. I

thought she was genuinely happy with the present (or at least happy

enough with her life at the time not to find it too disappointing). But

I don't know. We should ask Bryan or one of the other Lynskey

physiognomists to weigh in. Is it a smirk or a smile?

 

> Shipboard Fantasy : I think this is commonly thought of as Paul's

> fantasy, of running on board with the Hulmes, and longing to be one of

> them. It is, of course, but I also think it's Juliet's. What little family

> life this girl ever had was completely falling apart, first with Bill

> Perry moving in, and then with her parents announcing their divorce. She

> as much as Paul wanted a family to belong to.

 

Good point. It certainly could be a joint fantasy. Or perhaps simply

one of those 'filmmaker commentaries'--putting the characters' emotional

states in symbolic cinematic form.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.5 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: The Frighteners tidbit

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 12:56:21 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Thu, 20 Jun 1996, michaela drapes wrote:

 

> The Frighteners

> US Release date July 19

> Michael J. Fox, Trini Alvorado, Jeffery Combs, Dee Wallace-Stone

> Written By Walsh and Jackson, Directed by Jackson (Universal)

 

Anyone interested in reading a little more about this film might do well

to check out the latest editions of Cinescape and Fangoria. There are

articles in both. I haven't read all of them, so I'm not sure about

spoilers. I'm sure there are a few.

 

--Jefferson

 

P.S. Sweet bodements--Jackson has said that 'Frighteners' bears a slight

resemblance to HC in that it starts off 'fun', then gets progressively

darker. I can't wait.

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.6 ---------------

 

From: mailcall <mailcall@kiva.net>

Subject: Re: late night hc thoughts

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 13:03:37 -0500 (EST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

i think we should all write down our insights, because we're all

outstanding geniuses or we wouldn't be able to appreciate their

genius, right? i wrote tons of observations and insights when i first

saw the film and i emailed them all off to dr porter and he wrote

enthusiastically back again. when he gets back from borovnia, some of

the stuff i said will be in the next version of the faq. wait till he

sees heavenly web and all the archives of the list!

 

about what kate said:

 

jonsy's disappearing act. yeah it's clear he is just not a part of

their world, and it also represents how he kind of vanished out of

sight after the moider. dr hulme just took him away and no one ever

saw or heard from him again. we know he is alright today and has kids

of his own because anne perry mentions him in an interview that is

quoted in "heavenly lesbians". so she's in touch with him or at least

knows where he is.

 

yeah, i did notice that he vanished and then diello showed up. i

mentioned once that i thought jonsy kind of inspired them to create

diello (in the film i mean, i don't know how it was in real life).

 

: I think it's ironic and fitting that Pauline gets diaries both

: years, for they separate her, at least in writing, from the dull

: life of her family.

 

the diaries were what pauline really got from her dad, of course. he

may simply have not known what else to get her but that a diary was

appropriate for an introspective young person. maybe he remembered

someone in his family starting a diary at that age or maybe he'd kept

one himself. when he says "i hope it's alright" that could be "i hope

it's okay to give you a diary" but i heard it as "i hope this kind of

diary is alright," as in he couldn't afford to give her a fancy one,

especially since he follows it up with "it's from whitcombe and

coombes," i.e., it's not from letts' but it's good quality.

 

the fact that only her father gives her something really appropriate

and useful to her can be read on all sorts of levels, including the

fact that was not fully brought out in the film, that pauline and her

dad had been very close at one time and their relationship was based

on creativity. they just kind of drop the line in there, "you used to

love making things with dad, yvonne".

 

paul's hair: i saw her hair going straight as well. at digby's she

might have been told "smoothe down those curls." the fastest, easiest,

and cheapest way to do this was (and is) a hot oil conditioner.

combine this with the fact that like you said, they could be showing

her hair growing longer to show the passage of time, and even very

curly hair straightens out some as it gets longer, and the effect

shown in the film becomes very realistic. i didn't think of this

previously, but she could also have been straightening her hair some

to match juliet's.

 

: Ax : Paul walks up the stairs thinking, "I am trying to think

: of some way." Next shot - an ax cutting wood in half. Could this,

: uh, be the way?

 

first thing i thought of. the ax whacking down made it into the

trailer for the film, so one does wonder.

 

and that dreadful moment in the kitchen on the day of the moider, when

honora bends over to work on whatever she's got baking in the oven,

and paul & julie just ***look*** at each other... "hansel and gretel"

goes through every mind in the audience. ack. more later.

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.7 ---------------

 

From: "Chris Black" <qleap@interl.net>

Subject: Re: late night HC thoughts

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 13:30:35 +0000

 

 

>

> I didn't interpret her reaction at the first Christmas as a smirk. I

> thought she was genuinely happy with the present (or at least happy

> enough with her life at the time not to find it too disappointing). But

> I don't know. We should ask Bryan or one of the other Lynskey

> physiognomists to weigh in. Is it a smirk or a smile?

 

Oh, it's most defenitly a smile. :-)

 

 

--Chris "who hasn't been heard from much on here lately because he's

been on vacation!"

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n057.8 ---------------

 

From: michaela drapes <oleanna@mail.utexas.edu>

Subject: Re: The Frighteners tidbit

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 12:44:09 -0600

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

 

>P.S. Sweet bodements--Jackson has said that 'Frighteners' bears a slight

>resemblance to HC in that it starts off 'fun', then gets progressively

>darker. I can't wait.

 

And another thing..two of the characters' last name is Lynskey... (:

 

-michaela

--

Michaela R. Drapes

oleanna@mail.utexas.edu

NEW URL! http://www2.cibola.net/~michaela

"You've got to measure your life with love" -Rent

--

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n057 ---------------

 

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA11299 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:00:54 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id TAA24565; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:00:31 -0700

Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 19:00:31 -0700

Message-Id: <199606250200.TAA24565@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n058

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n058 --------------

 

001 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - Old digests -- acquisition

002 - Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@ - Anniversary/visit to NZ

003 - plath3@his.com (Peter Lat - Re: Port Levy & Victoria Park

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n058.1 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: Old digests -- acquisition

Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 18:57:49 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 578

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi,

 

Old digests are archived here --

 

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/hcdigests.html

 

It is kept relatively current. I try to update it at least twice

a month.

 

Indeed, time for another HC update, eh my fellow 4th World people!

 

I should have HC web updated again within a few days.

 

thanks,

b

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel, bryan woodworth

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryanw@borovnia.666.org

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 PGP Public Key obtainable

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/ via finger: bryanw@best.com

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n058.2 ---------------

 

From: Sandra Bowdler <sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>

Subject: Anniversary/visit to NZ

Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:23:30 +0800 (WST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

Hello fellow creatures,

 

I hope you all remembered that Saturday was the 42nd anniversary of the

Day of the Happy Event. I celebrated (?) by attending a performance of

La Traviata. I wrote a review for OPERA-L which contained a subtle

reference to that date. If anyone wants to play Spot the Reference (and I

don't believe there's a big crossover between OPERA-L and here), e-mail me

privately and I'll send it to you.

 

I will be in Auckland from July 2-15 - any fellow creatures want to meet

for a cup of coffee? I'm hoping to spend a day in Christchurch too,

although that rather depends on how my work goes in Auckland (boring,

boring).

 

cheers

 

Sandra Bowdler

 

sbowdler@cyllene.uwa.edu.au

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n058.3 ---------------

 

From: plath3@his.com (Peter Latham)

Subject: Re: Port Levy & Victoria Park

Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 11:09:42 -0500

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Were any of you struck by the pier scene at Port Levy? In that scene,

Juliet and Pauline run out on a pier, with Juliet in a commanding lead. At

the last minute she grasps a piling while Pauline hurtles over the edge of

the pier and into the water.In Victoria Park, Juliet grasps a tree in the

same manner, while Pauline initiates their plan. Both scenes suggest that

the girl's actions were driven by Juliet's ideas and Pauline's execution of

them.

 

Does this seem correct?

 

"Live each day as though it were your last, and one day you're sure to be

right." BREAKER MORANT (1979)

 

Sincerely,

 

Peter Latham

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n058 ---------------

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA05055 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:03:12 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id UAA04926; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:02:14 -0700

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:02:14 -0700

Message-Id: <199606260302.UAA04926@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n059

BestServHost: lists1.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists1.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists1.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n059 --------------

 

001 - Clscflm@aol.com - more music...

002 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: Port Levy & Victoria Park

003 - "Jefferson F. Morris" <jf - Re: more music...

004 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - Melanie

005 - michaela drapes <oleanna@ - Re: more music...

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n059.1 ---------------

 

From: Clscflm@aol.com

Subject: more music...

Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 22:24:29 -0400

 

Jefferson writes:

 

<< When I first saw the film, 'You'll never walk' was already a favorite

song of mine, and I was immediately struck by what a perfect choice it

was. The song would seem to contradict the literal events of the story,

in that Paul and Juliet will have to 'walk alone' for the rest of their

lives (with respect to each other), but the song itself is more an

exhortation for self-reliance ('Walk on with hope in your heart and

you'll never walk alone...'). I suppose it's a self-reliance that the

girls will now have to learn, whether they want to or not. >>

 

Yes, which intensifies the poignancy of the closing explanatory notes on the

girls' fate. All the music can be applied to both, but as always, it does

seem to be more closely linked with Pauline. Throughout, Pauline has always

seen herself as the one who would "die" without Juliet and the darker

operatic score emphasizes that. In Rogers and Hammerstein's _Carousel_

"You'll Never Walk Alone" closes the story, sung by the ghost of Billy

Bigelow as he finally accepts that his wife, Julie, loves him but is better

off without him. This realization frees him to finally go on to heaven. The

religious connection here (like the similarity of "Julie" with "Juliet"),

however slight, can't be overlooked.

 

ClscFlm

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n059.2 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: Port Levy & Victoria Park

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:35:54 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Mon, 24 Jun 1996, Peter Latham wrote:

 

> Were any of you struck by the pier scene at Port Levy? In that scene,

> Juliet and Pauline run out on a pier, with Juliet in a commanding lead. At

> the last minute she grasps a piling while Pauline hurtles over the edge of

> the pier and into the water.In Victoria Park, Juliet grasps a tree in the

> same manner, while Pauline initiates their plan. Both scenes suggest that

> the girl's actions were driven by Juliet's ideas and Pauline's execution of

> them.

>

> Does this seem correct?

 

Absolutely. Juliet is the clear leader at first, but Paul turns out to

be the one who's more willing to actually "take the plunge" and carry

things out. More willing to immerse herself in sensations. Juliet is

definitely more 'proper' and aloof in this regard. A result of her

upbringing, no doubt.

 

I think it's no accident that even though Juliet is the more

conventionally attractive of the two, it's Paul who actually experiments

sexually with others. And of course, she's the one who first introduces

the specter of sex and violence into their world, in the persona of "It."

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n059.3 ---------------

 

From: "Jefferson F. Morris" <jfmorris@CapAccess.org>

Subject: Re: more music...

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:43:31 -0400 (EDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

On Mon, 24 Jun 1996 Clscflm@aol.com wrote:

 

> In Rogers and Hammerstein's _Carousel_

> "You'll Never Walk Alone" closes the story, sung by the ghost of Billy

> Bigelow as he finally accepts that his wife, Julie, loves him but is better

> off without him. This realization frees him to finally go on to heaven. The

> religious connection here (like the similarity of "Julie" with "Juliet"),

> however slight, can't be overlooked.

 

...Except that Paul is now consigned to a psychological hell largely of

her own making. Paradise (as she's come to conceive it) is most

certainly lost. Irony once again.

 

It occurs to me that J&W must've done a hell of a lot of research on this

music. Either that, or divine providence led them to their choices.

It's slightly spooky that Mario Lanza recorded the song. The

musical/thematic closure it puts on the film is almost too perfect for

comfort. Funny how these things work out.

 

--Jefferson

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n059.4 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: Melanie

Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:58:19 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

Hi everyone,

 

By saying Melanie smirked at Christmas, I actually wasn't thinking of

her reaction to her father's present, which _was_ a smile, but more of

general attitude earlier in the scene watching her parents opening

presents, and the expression on her face as she gave Wendy the record. I

guess "smirk" was the wrong word, but I meant she didn't really seem into

the Christmas spirit.

"Her smoldering eyes still scorch my soul" - This can only be said

about Melanie Lynskey, and I see her in movies in my head all the time,

and yet Liv Tyler is on the cover of every magazine. I do believe very

often that the entertainment buisness is not about talent and emotions at

all, but just about money and superficiality and manipulating the public.

I'm sorry I only have to watch this great actress play characters in my

head. I'm glad the situation with Kate is different.

 

By the way, thanks for the warning, Michaela, about characters being

named Lynskey in The Frighteners, for I would have jumped up in the theater

in front of everyone and yelled "Oh my God!" or something.

 

_ kate

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n059.5 ---------------

 

From: michaela drapes <oleanna@mail.utexas.edu>

Subject: Re: more music...

Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 03:05:58 -0600

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

Re: "You'll Never Walk Alone"

 

Jefferson said:

>It's slightly spooky that Mario Lanza recorded the song. The

>musical/thematic closure it puts on the film is almost too perfect for

>comfort. Funny how these things work out.

 

Not really spooky...'Carousel' was first performed in 1945, ran for 890

performances on Broadway, and was made into a film in 1956. Considering

that Broadway tunes made up a sizeable chunk of popular music until rock and

roll began, and that "You'll Never Walk Alone" was one of the big songs from

the show, and that it is a bonanza number for a tenor-- its not surprising

that it became part of Lanza's repetoire, and one of his greatest hits.

 

...and don't ask how I know all this useless information...I just do...I'm

the answer-girl... (:

 

regards,

michaela "just call me Agent Dana Scully" drapes (;

--

Michaela R. Drapes

oleanna@mail.utexas.edu

NEW URL! http://www2.cibola.net/~michaela

Welcome to the tragic kingdom...

--

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n059 ---------------

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA29353 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 14:06:47 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id NAA22977; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 13:00:29 -0700

Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 13:00:29 -0700

Message-Id: <199606272000.NAA22977@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n060

BestServHost: lists.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n060 --------------

 

001 - GorillaBlu@aol.com - Ba-bye...

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n060.1 ---------------

 

From: GorillaBlu@aol.com

Subject: Ba-bye...

Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:40:01 -0400

 

Sorry but could you please remove me from the list?

Thanks all...

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n060 ---------------

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA11591 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Mon, 1 Jul 1996 13:01:22 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id NAA01532; Mon, 1 Jul 1996 13:00:59 -0700

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 13:00:59 -0700

Message-Id: <199607012000.NAA01532@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n061

BestServHost: lists.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n061 --------------

 

001 - Thaiphong Vo <thaivo@ea.o - Melanie Lyskey Page Up.. partially at least.

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n061.1 ---------------

 

From: Thaiphong Vo <thaivo@ea.oac.uci.edu>

Subject: Melanie Lyskey Page Up.. partially at least.

Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 12:15:02 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 

the url is http://www.best.com/~thaivo

 

hope it's interesting to yah.. : )

 

-Thai

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n061 ---------------

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA04347 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 1996 21:00:49 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id VAA28415; Tue, 2 Jul 1996 21:00:36 -0700

Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 21:00:36 -0700

Message-Id: <199607030400.VAA28415@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n062

BestServHost: lists.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n062 --------------

 

001 - mailcall <mailcall@kiva.n - Re: E non ho amato mai tanto la vita!

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n062.1 ---------------

 

From: mailcall <mailcall@kiva.net>

Subject: Re: E non ho amato mai tanto la vita!

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 23:00:23 -0500 (EST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

tosca is a perfect opera for them. when i was their age, i loved it

too. it is a very borovnian story. it takes place during the

napoleonic wars, so right after the french revolution (antoinette).

the music is some of the most grandiose (or just plain ose) puccini

ever wrote, and the plot is simple but effective. it has court

intrigue, torture scenes, a villain you'll never forget, daring

escapes, transvestism, i could go on and on. it was perfect for them.

 

the very best version of "tosca" that was ever recorded is a

much-circulated bootleg tape featuring maria callas, franco (forget

about lanza!) corelli, and tito gobbi. the scenes between callas and

gobbi are bone-chilling. some of them were filmed and you can

occasionally see them on television if you're lucky. paul and julie

would not have heard any of this at the time. i hope they got to hear

it later.

 

tito gobbi was a venetian actor with a bizarre voice which didn't

sound at all operatic, and a magnetic stage presence even in his elder

years. his portrayal of baron scarpia still influences baritones and

basses who attempt the part today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n062 ---------------

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA15760 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 18:04:41 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id SAA03516; Mon, 8 Jul 1996 18:01:14 -0700

Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 18:01:14 -0700

Message-Id: <199607090101.SAA03516@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n063

BestServHost: lists.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n063 --------------

 

001 - Bao Ly <lybao@earthlink.n - Association for Mormon Letters Roundtable re: Anne Perry

002 - Bao Ly <lybao@earthlink.n - Association for Mormon Letters Roundtable re: Anne Perry II

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n063.1 ---------------

 

From: Bao Ly <lybao@earthlink.net>

Subject: Association for Mormon Letters Roundtable re: Anne Perry

Date: Sun, 07 Jul 1996 17:23:20 -0700

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hi everyone,

 

I have just recently stumbled across the Association for Mormon Letters

Roundtable (AML-List) and found some rather intriguing 'rumors' regarding

Anne Perry that I thought you might be interested in reading.. Their

website is located at http://cc.weber.edu/aml/

 

However, I will just post my findings here to save everyone some time from

having to dig through their log files for 1994-1995. What I basically

found was rumors of Anne Perry breaking surface in May 1995, two articles

that I wasn't aware existed, a citation of AML awards for Anne Perry_The

Sins of the Wolf, and a book review of 'A Sudden, Fearful Death.'

I will only post the 'rumors' and the separate article here, unless

somebody (-bryan?) want me to post the remainder..

 

There are also two new websites re: Heavenly Creatures as of late!

 

The Frighteners

http://frighteners.com

 

A Melanie Lynskey Worship Page

http://www.best.com/~thaivo

 

Come on everybody, lets go and give them our support!

 

 

 

- BEGIN -

 

Association for Mormon Letters Roundtable

(AML-List)

Archive for April 1996

376 messages

 

 

 

========================================

Date: 1-APR-1996 09:05:22.40

From: IN%"aml-list@cc.weber.edu"

Subject: Anne PERRY in Utah (Deseret News)

To: IN%"aml-list@cc.weber.edu"

 

-----------------------------------------------------------

 

Greatest mystery is one she won't reveal

 

-----------------------------------------------------------

 

By Susan Lyman-Whitney

Deseret News staff writer

 

 

If you kill someone and serve a prison sentence and pay your debt to

society, then society is supposed to let you have a fresh start. People

aren't supposed to keep on thinking about the murder.

 

But when that fresh start includes being a murder-mystery writer? Well.

Her readers can't be blamed for remembering that Anne Perry has firsthand

knowledge of murder. They can't blame themselves for being fascinated.

 

In 1994, a journalist revealed Perry's original name to be Juliet Hulme.

That was also the year of the movie ''Heavenly Creatures,'' the story of

how 15-year-old Juliet and her best friend, Pauline, came to murder

Pauline's mother some 30 years ago in New Zealand. They beat her head with

a brick.

 

Perry won't talk about her past. If she could give some tidy explanation

of how it felt to be a brilliant and fantasy-driven 15-year-old, perhaps

she would do so. But she doesn't. She doesn't chat about murder. She

writes it. We, her readers, are drawn in by her complexity, the complexity

of who she was then and who she is now.

 

And even before 1994, Perry's readers found themselves drawn in by her.

Her mysteries are set in Victorian England, and she creates the world in

exquisite detail. Then, too, her characters have always been mysterious.

On the surface, they lead placid and privileged lives. The reader can

never be sure what motivations and turmoil hide within, can never be sure

which of them has committed a violent crime. None seems more evil than the

others.

 

Perry comes to Utah this week on a book tour to promote her 22nd mystery

novel, a Book-of-the-Month Club main selection titled ''Pentecost Alley.''

She'll sign copies from noon to 1:30 p.m. Thursday, April 4, at the

Deseret Book in the ZCMI Center. She will also be at A Woman's Place in

Park City from 7-8:30 p.m. that evening.

 

Perry talked with the Deseret News from a hotel in California. She spoke

of her home and of the way she works. She spoke of evil, too. The evil her

characters commit.

 

Her imagination is vivid, says Anne Perry. She lives in bucolic rural

Scotland, in a lovely house with two acres of gardens and a view of the

sea. In her mind, however, she walks through drawing rooms and slums of

Victorian London -- seeing, smelling, hearing, living. She says, ''How can

I expect

to take you there if I'm not there?''

 

Perry has never married and lives alone, but near her mother and other

good friends. She works hard. She writes six days a week from 9 a.m. to 5

p.m. Sometimes after dinner she returns to her writing. On Sunday, she

rests, if teaching Primary can be said to be restful. (Perry joined the LDS

Church 20 years ago.)

 

She works so hard, she says, because she wants time for writing something

besides mysteries, and she is committed to producing two mysteries a year.

In a short press-release biography, Perry explains her other writing: ''I

am writing an epic fantasy which I began when my agent said to me that I

had a better book in me than I had so far written, because I always held

something back, 'pulled my punches.' She told me to do something entirely

for myself, regardless of whether I thought it would sell or not. I thought

for a long time as to what kind of story I wanted -- war story, mystery or

love story. . . . .''

 

Thus the reader, who would be fascinated by Anne Perry's autobiography,

learns that even when she's trying to not hold anything back, Perry still

finds herself writing fiction.

 

Perry writes, annually, one mystery in the Charlotte and Inspector Pitt

series and one featuring William Monk, a detective who can only partially

remember his own dark past. Monk allows Perry to ''raise questions about

responsibility, particularly that of a person for acts he cannot

remember.''

 

Charlotte and Thomas Pitt allow Perry to write about loyalty, devotion and

love, a restrained sort of love. They met in the first book of the series

and married, and in successive books are raising children. They have their

ups and downs, says Perry, but they will never separate. ''There is enough

angst going on everywhere else. I am tired of reading about people who

cannot form happy relationships.''

 

Her topics come from modern life. She ''transmutes'' them back in time.

Perry watches television, reads the papers. She hears of a murder,

something with a basis in child abuse or incest or some other social ill,

Perry finds herself fascinated.

 

She says, ''You just hear about this crime and you know there has to be

more to it. You want to know what happened before and you want to know

what happened after.''

 

Yes. Precisely. Anne Perry's readers can understand that feeling of

compelling curiosity.

 

Published 31 March, c. 1996 Deseret News Publishing Co.

[used with permission]

 

========================================

 

 

 

 

- END -

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n063.2 ---------------

 

From: Bao Ly <lybao@earthlink.net>

Subject: Association for Mormon Letters Roundtable re: Anne Perry II

Date: Sun, 07 Jul 1996 17:40:11 -0700

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------684338DC2E2A"

 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

 

--------------684338DC2E2A

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Beware!! This may work differently than what I intend it to do..

 

--------------684338DC2E2A

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="AML-Rumors.txt"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="AML-Rumors.txt"

 

Association for Mormon Letters Roundtable

(AML-List)

1995 Subject Table of Contents

 

-------------

 

May 1995

183 Messages

 

snip! (1-89)

 

90 Mon May 15 09:15 Rumors

91 Mon May 15 10:02 Re: Rumors (ANNE PERRY)

92 Mon May 15 10:20 Re: Rumors (Anne Perry)

93 Mon May 15 12:22 Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

94 Mon May 15 12:24 Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

95 Mon May 15 12:59 Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

96 Mon May 15 13:26 Forwarded Message

97 Mon May 15 13:27 Re: Rumors (PERRY, EDDINGS)

98 Mon May 15 13:30 LDS MYSTERY WRITERS (TOURNEY)

99 Mon May 15 14:55 Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

 

101 Mon May 15 15:06 Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

102 Mon May 15 22:05 Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

 

105 Tue May 16 09:00 PERRY & EDDINGS on the Web

 

112 Wed May 17 12:33 Re: Rumors

 

118 Wed May 17 17:17 Re: Rumors, Diaries

119 Wed May 17 17:56 Re: PERRY, LIFE WRITING

120 Wed May 17 21:11 Re: PERRY

121 Wed May 17 21:17 PERRY in SL Tribune

 

 

snip! (122-183)

 

 

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 09:15 MDT 1995

From: BENSON PARKINSON <BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu>

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Rumors

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 09:08:28 -0700 (MST)

 

Can someone help me track down these rumors:

 

I heard a prominent British mystery writer was interviewed on NPR

a little while ago. This is the same writer who as an adolescent

helped her friend murder her mother, as portrayed in a recent

move. (This is one of the disadvantages of working at home.

I've thrown out all the reviews I've read and can't easily get to

the library to look up the names and titles). In any case, she

indicated she had converted to Mormonism as an adult. Can anyone

verify this and fill in the gaps?

 

Also, a couple of young sf/fantasy fans in my ward told me they

had seen a lot of Book of Mormon parallels in David Eddings

_Belgariad_ cycle, and in a similar cycle by a different author.

Can anyone shed any light on this?

 

Benson Parkinson

Moderator, AML-List

BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu

Ogden, Utah, USA

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 10:02 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: Rumors (ANNE PERRY)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 09:53:40 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"dcombe@rain.org" "Dave Combe" 15-MAY-1995 09:46:58.71

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC: IN%"AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu" "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List"

Subj: RE: Rumors

 

The "British" mystery writer is Anne Perry, who under her previous name, as

a teenager supposedly helped another teen murder the other girls mother.

She is actually from New Zealand, that is where the murder occured. My

recollection now is that at the time of the death, Anne Perry was on a

medication for a mental illness; this is my current recollection of the

news article describing this case. Later emigrated to England, where she

joined the church, I understand that she currently lives in No. California.

 

This has been discussed on other LDS related lists, but I am sure I have

saved none of these posts. This was covered in an article in the

NYTimes, and ads for the film made of this case, at least in the LA

papers, made much of the fact that Sister Perry had not seen the film and

the ads stated that one ticket for each showing would not be sold so she

could come and see it for free. The name of the film is escaping me at

the moment, but it received at least one Academy Award nomination in a

writing category this past April. It did not win.

 

Ann Perry writes two series of mysteries, both set in Victorian England,

In one series, the policeman is recovering

from amnesia and is trying to learn more about himself as he continues

working on the cases. I like this series better then the other one,but

for some reason the names of the detectives and the film are escaping me

right now.

 

Dave Combe

dcombe@rain.org

 

On Mon, 15 May 1995, BENSON PARKINSON wrote:

 

> Can someone help me track down these rumors:

>

> I heard a prominent British mystery writer was interviewed on NPR

> a little while ago. This is the same writer who as an adolescent

> helped her friend murder her mother, as portrayed in a recent

> move. (This is one of the disadvantages of working at home.

> I've thrown out all the reviews I've read and can't easily get to

> the library to look up the names and titles). In any case, she

> indicated she had converted to Mormonism as an adult. Can anyone

> verify this and fill in the gaps?

>

> Also, a couple of young sf/fantasy fans in my ward told me they

> had seen a lot of Book of Mormon parallels in David Eddings

> _Belgariad_ cycle, and in a similar cycle by a different author.

> Can anyone shed any light on this?

>

> Benson Parkinson

> Moderator, AML-List

> BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu

> Ogden, Utah, USA

>

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 10:20 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: Rumors (Anne Perry)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 10:09:09 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"kevinc@lks.csi.com" "Kevin Christensen" 15-MAY-1995 09:58:45.37

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC: IN%"kevinc@lks.csi.com"

Subj: RE: Rumors

 

>I heard a prominent British mystery writer was interviewed on NPR

>a little while ago. This is the same writer who as an adolescent

>helped her friend murder her mother, as portrayed in a recent

>movie.

 

The file is called "Heavenly Creatures." The writer is Anne Perry, psuedonym

for Juliet Hulme. I chanced to see her interviewed by Barbara Walters on

20/20. She is a thoroughly captivating individual, coming across to me as

unpretentious and sympathetic, in stark contrast to the rather tacky woman who

decided to tell the tabloid press where she was and what she was doing. The

crime took place in New Zealand in 1954. Quoting from the San Francisco

Chronicle, Monday, Nov 21, 1994:

 

-According to Perry, Pauline was suicidal, "I sincerely believed that her life

was in the balance. Crazy as it sounds, I thought it was one life or the

other. I just couldn't face the thought of being responsible for her dying."

There were extenuating circumstances. "Because of this chest ailment," Perry

said, "I had been treated with drugs that have since been withdrawn because

they tend to warp judgement. And though the normal course of treatment was

three months, I had them for nine."

End quote.

 

She served 5 and 1/2 years in prison, a lot of it in solitary. After being

released, she moved to Scotland. Before being baptized as Mormon, she told

the local leaders about her history. She reports that everyone in her

community has been supportive since the story broke. She lives quietly with

her mother, and writes mysteries set in turn-of-the-century London.

 

--Kevin Christensen

Technical Writer

Lawrence, KS

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 12:22 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 12:17:03 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"sburton@unr.edu" "Stacy Burton" 15-MAY-1995 12:01:37.27

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: RE: PERRY (was Rumors)

 

> I heard a prominent British mystery writer was interviewed on NPR

> a little while ago. This is the same writer who as an adolescent

> helped her friend murder her mother, as portrayed in a recent

> move. (This is one of the disadvantages of working at home.

> I've thrown out all the reviews I've read and can't easily get to

> the library to look up the names and titles). In any case, she

> indicated she had converted to Mormonism as an adult. Can anyone

> verify this and fill in the gaps?

 

Her name is Anne Perry. There was a long article about her in the NY

Times last fall and another by Peggy Fletcher Stack in the SL Tribune on

April 22nd.

 

Stacy Burton

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 12:24 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 12:17:29 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"sburton@unr.edu" "Stacy Burton" 15-MAY-1995 12:01:36.79

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: PERRY (was Rumors)

 

Here's the text of the NY Times article last fall. The SL Tribune article

last month dealt more with Perry's Mormonism. Perry is British; she lived

in New Zealand as an adolescent and in the United States in the later

1960s, where she joined the LDS Church in California.

 

Stacy Burton

 

____

The New York Times, Wednesday, August 17, 1994

BOOK NOTES

Uncovering A Mystery Writer's Hidden Past

by SARAH LYALL

For years Anne Perry hs been a prolific and very succesful author of

exqusitely detailed mystery novels set in Victorian England. She is

a familiar figure to readers and booksellser here as well as in her

native Britain, so much so that three million copies of her 19 novels

are in print in the United States alone.

That is why it comes as such a shock to those who know here and those

who read her that Miss Perry, who is 55 and lives with her mother in the

tiny Scottish village of Portmahomack, has a hidden past as startling

as anything in the most melodramatic mystery story. Forty years ago,

sent to New Zealand to recover from an illness. Just 15, she served five

and a half years in prison before changing her name and beginning a new

life.

For all these years, only her family and most immediate circle have known

MIss Perry's secret. But it all surfaced recently when a forthcoming

film about the infamous incident--in which Miss Perry helped a friend

kill the friend's mother--caused journalists in New Zealand to track her

down. The news about Miss Perry has been seeping out, with articles in

New Zealand and Britain, but isn't widely known in the United States.

Miss Perry's 20th book, "The Sins of the Wolf," which deals with a young

nurse imprisoned for a crime she did not commit, is due to be published

by Fawcett Columbine in September and the publisher has been positioning

it as a big book that might put Miss Perry on national best-seller lists

for the first time. Through her publisher and agent, the author

turned down requests for an interview.

But she told a London newspaper last week that the murder took place when

she was suffering from a severe chest ailment and her lone friend, a

desperately unhappy teenager named Pauline, was threatening to commit

suicide. So Miss Perry--who said she had been taking medication that

has since been withdrawn from circulation because it impairs judgment--

helped Pauline kill her mother by hitting the woman on the head with a

rock. "I've completely blocked it out," Miss Perry told The Daily

Telegraph. "All I can say is that it was violent, and quick."

About her friend Pauline, she said: "I sincerely believed that her

life was in the balance. Crazy as this sound, I thought it

was one life or the other. I just couldn't face the thought of

being responsible for her dying. And I made a very foolish choice."

Miss Perry has done plenty of atoning over the years, living quietly

and becoming involved in the Mormon church. Her literary agent in

Loondon, Meg Davis, who first heard the story from a reporter in

New Zealand, said Miss Perry had always feared that her past would

overtake her.

"She wanted to put it behind her and make something of her life,"

Miss Davis said. "She's got a very strong ethical sense and she

was very worried, because obviously this is something that makes

you instantly judge a person. She's really had to take her courage

into her hands and go into the local shops and tell them, because

where she lives, everybody knows everybody else."

Miss Perry has been surprised, Miss Davis said, by the support she

has received from colleagues and neighbors. And the author said

in the interview that her faith had helped her make peace with what

she did. "I think all Christian faiths will say that if you

have paid the price and truly repented," she said, "there is for-

giveness."

___

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 12:59 MDT 1995

From: BENSON PARKINSON <BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu>

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 12:48:54 -0700 (MST)

 

Stacy Burton answered my querry:

 

| Her name is Anne Perry. There was a long article about her in the NY

| Times last fall and another by Peggy Fletcher Stack in the SL Tribune on

| April 22nd.

 

You typed out the NY Times article for us. I wonder if you (or

someone else) saved the Tribune review?

 

(Just to be sure, I called the Tribune. We can reprint their

reviews in full as long as we say where they came from.)

 

Benson Parkinson

Moderator, AML-List

BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu

Ogden, Utah, USA

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 13:26 MDT 1995

From: BENSON PARKINSON <BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu>

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Forwarded Message

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 13:09:19 -0700 (MST)

 

I am forwarding a message from Joyce Beazer, which I believe she intended

for the list, though it is addressed to me personally.

 

Benson Parkinson

Moderator, AML-List

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 13:27 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: Rumors (PERRY, EDDINGS)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 13:10:27 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"beazer_j@lib.dixie.edu" "Joyce Beazer" 15-MAY-1995 13:02:22.50

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: RE: Rumors

 

Benson, The author's name is Anne Perry. She is a very! popular mystery

writer. She was written up in Christian Science Monitor and the New York

Times....sometime in January/February. I clipped the CSM review and

probably the NYT but have since pitched them. She joined the Church when

she lived in California [I think] but am not sure she is active now.

 

Yes, my friends who read David Eddings claim he is a Mormon. At least,

his writings reflect Mormonism. There is a female writer who name slips

me at the moment who is cataloged both in fiction and mormon

fiction...When I go to work there tonight, I shall try and recall the

name, I think I remember where her books are located.

 

Joyce Beazer

Val Browning Library

Dixie College

 

 

On Mon, 15 May 1995, BENSON PARKINSON wrote:

 

> Can someone help me track down these rumors:

>

> I heard a prominent British mystery writer was interviewed on NPR

> a little while ago. This is the same writer who as an adolescent

> helped her friend murder her mother, as portrayed in a recent

> move. (This is one of the disadvantages of working at home.

> I've thrown out all the reviews I've read and can't easily get to

> the library to look up the names and titles). In any case, she

> indicated she had converted to Mormonism as an adult. Can anyone

> verify this and fill in the gaps?

>

> Also, a couple of young sf/fantasy fans in my ward told me they

> had seen a lot of Book of Mormon parallels in David Eddings

> _Belgariad_ cycle, and in a similar cycle by a different author.

> Can anyone shed any light on this?

>

> Benson Parkinson

> Moderator, AML-List

> BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu

> Ogden, Utah, USA

>

 

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 13:30 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: LDS MYSTERY WRITERS (TOURNEY)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 13:12:46 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"austin@humanitas.ucsb.edu" "Michael Austin" 15-MAY-1995 13:09:05.67

To: IN%"byparkinson@cc.weber.edu" "AML-LIST"

CC:

Subj: LDS MYSTERY WRITERS

 

The discussion of Anne Perry has been quite interesting and has reminded

me of a question I was going to pose to the list about another LDS

mystery writer. One of my friends and colleagues here at UCSB is Leonard

Tourney, an English professor who also writes excellent mysteries on the

side. All of the mysteries are set in late-Elizabethian/Early-Stuart

England and deal with the adventuress of a part-time constable (Matthew

Stock) and his wife (Joan Stock) who solve murders. The titles include:

_The Player's Boy is Dead_, _Familiar Spirits_, _Low Treason_, _The

Bartholemew Fair Murders_, _Old Saxon Blood_, _Witness of Bones_, and

_Frobisher's Savage._ All, I believe, are published in hard abck by St.

Martins Press and in Paperback by Ballantine.

 

>From what I have seen, the books have been well-reviewed by critics.

However, I have never seen anything that discusses Leonard's religion. He

is an active Latter-day Saint and a member of the Santa Barbara Stake High

Council. I'm just curious as to whether or not anyone else has ever heard

of Leonard's books (in an LDS context or otherwise). I have read most of

them, and I think that they are great--but, because of the situation, I

am somewhat biased.

 

Regards,

 

Mike

 

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 14:55 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 14:47:14 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"sburton@unr.edu" "Stacy Burton" 15-MAY-1995 14:07:15.15

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: RE: PERRY (was Rumors)

 

> You typed out the NY Times article for us. I wonder if you (or

> someone else) saved the Tribune review?

 

The NY Times piece I had an electronic copy of from last year. I do have

the Tribune article (happened to be in Utah for a narrative conference the

weekend it was published). It is fairly long, and I am swamped with

finals and seminar papers to grade. At the end of the week, if someone

who has access to a scanner hasn't sent it to the list, I'll make time to

type it in.

 

Stacy Burton

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 15:06 MDT 1995

From: BENSON PARKINSON <BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu>

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 14:58:47 -0700 (MST)

 

Stacy Burton wrote:

 

| The NY Times piece I had an electronic copy of from last year. I do have

| the Tribune article (happened to be in Utah for a narrative conference the

| weekend it was published). It is fairly long, and I am swamped with

| finals and seminar papers to grade. At the end of the week, if someone

| who has access to a scanner hasn't sent it to the list, I'll make time to

| type it in.

 

It may be Stack's article on Anne Perry is available over

Utah Online, the Salt Lake Tribune's electronic service. This is

available free I believe to all Salt Lake area Tribune subscribers.

 

Do we have anyone out there who subscribes (or who could)?

 

Benson Parkinson

Moderator, AML-List

BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu

Ogden, Utah, USA

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Mon May 15 22:05 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY (was Rumors)

Date: Mon, 15 May 1995 21:58:59 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"jmaxwell@thelair.zynet.com" "Jim Maxwell" 15-MAY-1995 21:50:46.64

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: RE: Rumors

 

If you want a good insight into the whole controversey rent the movie

_Heavenly Creatures_. The film is the story of the murder. I know that

the author in question moved to New Zealand and hopeful anonimity after

the murder. I believe it was there that she converted. Seh had her

snonimity until a reprter from one of the British tabloids started to

research the story behind the film and stumbeled accross the author. I

also know that her community has backed her 100% since the story broke.

 

=============================================================================

Jim

jmaxwell@thelair.zynet.com

 

 

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Tue May 16 09:00 MDT 1995

From: BENSON PARKINSON <BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu>

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: PERRY & EDDINGS on the Web

Date: Tue, 16 May 1995 08:52:17 -0700 (MST)

 

AML-Listers,

 

I found a WWW page with an interview of Anne Perry by David

Lyman. It's a subpage on a page called Cinecism, which I think

is an online film magazine, perhaps with ties to a Seattle film

festival. (I came into the middle through a search engine, which

often makes orienting yourself difficult.)

 

It refers to her as a devout Mormon, speaks of her distress

at having her past dragged out and at being hounded by the media,

and (surprise) actually treats her novels.

 

The URL is:

 

http://www.film.com/film/news/

 

or to go there directly:

 

http://www.film.com/film/interviews/perry.lyman.html

 

 

I also located a David Eddings home page at:

 

http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/rshah/eddings.html

 

This contains biographical note and bibliography. No mention of

Mormonism.

 

While you're at it, check out Gideon Burton's Mormon

Literature page:

 

http://humanities.byu.edu/MLDB/mlithome.htm

 

(If all this is Greek to you, get someone to introduce you to

Netscape, Mosaic, Lynx, or another Web browser. Many or most of

you will have one on your networks. I can provide background if

required.)

 

Benson Parkinson

Moderator, AML-List

BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu

Ogden, Utah, USA

 

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Wed May 17 12:33 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: Rumors

Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 12:20:39 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"geb@dsl.pitt.edu" "Gordon Banks" 17-MAY-1995 11:27:02.96

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: RE: Rumors

 

On Mon, 15 May 1995, BENSON PARKINSON wrote:

 

> Can someone help me track down these rumors:

>

> I heard a prominent British mystery writer was interviewed on NPR

> a little while ago. This is the same writer who as an adolescent

> helped her friend murder her mother, as portrayed in a recent

> move. (This is one of the disadvantages of working at home.

> I've thrown out all the reviews I've read and can't easily get to

> the library to look up the names and titles). In any case, she

> indicated she had converted to Mormonism as an adult. Can anyone

> verify this and fill in the gaps?

>

 

Yes, she's quite famous, but I forgot her name, not being a mystery fan.

They apparently are making a movie out of her story (without her permission).

 

> Also, a couple of young sf/fantasy fans in my ward told me they

> had seen a lot of Book of Mormon parallels in David Eddings

> _Belgariad_ cycle, and in a similar cycle by a different author.

> Can anyone shed any light on this?

 

I didn't notice that in Eddings, but obviously, you know about Scott Card

and his latest series which is essentially a SF re-write of the BoM.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gordon Banks N3JXP |"Reality must take precedence over public relations,

geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu | for nature cannot be fooled." --Richard Feynman

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Wed May 17 17:17 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: Rumors, Diaries

Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 17:07:45 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"BEECHERM@acd1.byu.edu" 17-MAY-1995 16:55:30.57

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: RE: Rumors

 

New Zealand born Anne Parry (Perry?) is the writer in question, and

the movie has already appeared. Sorry I can't recall its title, but

it played in SLC recently--my kids would know.

 

We met Anne in England in 1987 when she attended the Mormon History

Association meetings at Oxford. She was then a recent (?) convert,

and her contact there brought her to Utah--all this before her story

came out. Ida Smith at the BYU Alumnae office would know her current

whereabouts.

 

Maureen Beecher

 

P.S. I'm pleased to be part of the exchange, but overwhelmed with the

volume to date. I'd like to see some talk of life writing--diaries,

letters, autobiographies--become part of the dialogue. I'll put

together a post sometime, but it would be helpful to have some

background of what you may already have considered.

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Wed May 17 17:56 MDT 1995

From: BENSON PARKINSON <BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu>

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY, LIFE WRITING

Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 17:45:51 -0700 (MST)

 

Maureen Beecher wrote:

 

| New Zealand born Anne Parry (Perry?) is the writer in question, and

| the movie has already appeared. Sorry I can't recall its title, but

 

Several have written in with information on Anne Perry (nee

Juliet Hulme) and the film _Heavenly Creatures_. Our

correspondents disagree on whether she was born in New Zealand or

emmigrated there from Britain, and whether she presently lives in

Scotland or California.

 

We've been promised a copy of an interview by Peggy Stack that

ran April 22nd in the Salt Lake Tribune that we've been told

deals with her Mormonism.

 

I'd personally like to see a bit more on her books (I've enjoyed

what info we've had), our correspondant's reactions to them,

whether they contain references to Mormonism or gospel themes,

etc.

 

| P.S. I'm pleased to be part of the exchange, but overwhelmed with the

 

Glad to have you here.

 

| volume to date. I'd like to see some talk of life writing--diaries,

| letters, autobiographies--become part of the dialogue. I'll put

| together a post sometime, but it would be helpful to have some

| background of what you may already have considered.

 

Please do. There has been some discussion on genres, including

life writing, along the lines of whether or not it forms part of

"Mormon Literature." I believe all correspondents (and the

moderator) agree that it does.

 

The archive is available from me if you wish to go through it.

It's large (400K) with 118 messages to date.

 

Benson Parkinson

Moderator, AML-List

BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu

Ogden, Utah, USA

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Wed May 17 21:11 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: Re: PERRY

Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 20:59:44 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"sburton@unr.edu" "Stacy Burton" 17-MAY-1995 19:32:47.37

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: RE: PERRY, LIFE WRITING

 

> correspondents disagree on whether she was born in New Zealand or

> emmigrated there from Britain, and whether she presently lives in

> Scotland or California.

 

The articles published about Perry in the last year in the NY Times, the

SL Tribune, _People_, and so on consistently say that she is English, that

she lived in New Zealand as an adolescent, and that she presently lives

in Scotland.

> I'd personally like to see a bit more on her books (I've enjoyed

> what info we've had), our correspondant's reactions to them,

> whether they contain references to Mormonism or gospel themes,

> etc.

 

There are two series, one with Thomas and Charlotte Pitt, another with

William Monk, both set in Victorian England. I've read a few of the first

series, set in the 1880s, and none of the second, apparently set in the

1860s. One of the novels in the first series deals, eventually, with a

character who has connections to a socially-suspect American religious

group not unlike the Mormons.

 

Stacy Burton

 

 

========================================

>From BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu Wed May 17 21:17 MDT 1995

To: "Association for Mormon Letters Discussion List" <AML-LIST@chp.weber.edu>

Subject: PERRY in SL Tribune

Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 21:06:02 -0700 (MST)

 

From: IN%"sburton@unr.edu" "Stacy Burton" 17-MAY-1995 20:28:58.16

To: IN%"BYPARKINSON@cc.weber.edu" "BENSON PARKINSON"

CC:

Subj: Perry in SL Tribune

 

The Salt Lake Tribune

22 April 1995

pp. D1, D4

 

Through the Past Darkly: Mormon Writer Was Convicted of Murder at 15

By Peggy Fletcher Stack

 

Characters in Anne Perry's mystery novels all inhabit the restricted

world of Victorian England. In her own life as a Mormon, Perry has chosen a

faith with clear-cut ideas about God and humanity.

But there are times, she says, when a good writer who would be great must

go beyond the safety of known territory.

"You have to make a deeper and deeper journey into yourself," Perry, 55,

said this week in a telephone interview from her home in Scotland. "If you

are going to dredge up something of yourself, it is hard work."

Perry knows firsthand the agony of self-discovery.

She always wanted to be a writer. As a child in England she was

hospitalized repeatedly for lung ailments and passed the time inventing

stories.

She was 41 when her first mystery was published, and since then Perry has

worked at a furious pace, often producing two novels a year. With 20 titles

and 3 million books in print in the United States alone, Perry has finally

achieved commercial success.

Last summer, when the future looked nothing but rosy, Perry was hit with

a bombshell.

The international press got wind that 40 years earlier in New Zealand,

Perry--born Juliet Hulme--was convicted of murder for helping to kill the

mother of a friend.

Since she was only 15 at the time, Perry served just 5 1/2 years in

prison.

The crime is the subject of a film, "Heavenly Creatures," playing in Salt

Lake City. Perry has not seen the film and has no plans to do so, objecting

to its depictions of her and her friend.

After prison, Perry changed her name and rejoined her mother and

stepfather in England. She kept busy in mostly clerical jobs in sales and

fashion and worked as a flight attendant and insurance underwriter.

Her search for a career led her to Southern California, where she lived

for five years. It was there, 27 years ago today, that she joined The Church

of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

"I was raised agnostic," Perry said, respecting most religions but

belonging to none.

But in California, an LDS neighbor "seemed to have something special."

She began to learn more about the Mormon faith. Though she struggled

initially with some of its precepts, her friend urged her "not to work it

through in your brain, just get down on your knees and pray."

She took the advice. The next morning, she recalled, "I knew I had the

answer."

After deciding to join the church, Perry told LDS authorities about the

murder. Though Perry didn't mention it, her baptism was probably approved by

the church's governing First Presidency because church policy requires such

approval before a convicted murderer can be baptized.

Perry said that among other doctrines, the Mormon notions of freedom and

sin appealed to her.

"Sin has got to be having a choice and deliberately taking the wrong

one," she said. "You sin when you turn your back on the light. You can't sin

without the light to know the difference."

Jesus Christ's resurrection was not only about the body, Perry said, but

"the cosmic regeneration of the whole Earth."

"Every day we can make a new start," Perry said.

In the late 1980s, Perry received an "apostolic blessing" from Elder

Russell Nelson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

"It was about my writing and what I can accomplish," she said. Though

she declined to share details of the ritual because she considers it private

and sacred, she said "it has provided the complete direction for my life and

everything I do."

Like most active Mormons, Perry quickly became immersed in the church's

communal life. Members of a congregation staff all the leadership positions

in a local unit. Perry held positions in the Relief Society for adult women,

in Young Women, in Primary for children under 12, and in Sunday School. She

even served as a spokeswoman briefly.

"As a novelist, one of the best schooling grounds is a church calling,"

she said. "What a great thing it was for me as a writer to be a Relief

Society president. I got to know people well and care about them."

Though her books are set in Victorian England, Perry has drawn on her

Mormon experiences to create real and memorable characters. She also has used

her faith to explore social issues such as spouse abuse, abortion, anti-

Semitism, child abuse, slum profiteering and child prostitution.

Her books also examine psychological issues such as loyalty, identity and

guilt.

But for the past several years, Perry has taken a new tack. She is

working on a fantasy novel.

At first, she felt herself holding back, censoring the "inner passion"--

fearing her fellow Mormons might not accept her work.

"I wish to obey, I have no desire to rebel, for to do so would be to

imagine I know better than God what is good for me, or for others," Perry said

in a 1988 speech. "I have had too many contrary experiences now to suffer

that illusion any more."

Still, Perry knew that to be an artist, not an artisan, a person must

"let go of the safety of known territory, that which is orthodox, already

charted and pronounced safe, and strike off to explore a new region."

And so she has continued working on the fantasy, now planned for three

volumes, which will explore Mormon themes of freedom and personal

responsibility.

"It answers the question of who I am," she said.

In the last eight months since the news about her past became public

knowledge, Perry has been forced to "dig down into my gut."

"It has made me ask questions I haven't asked before, or go into parts of

myself I haven't explored," she said.

Her faith has also deepened.

"So often we trust in God with one foot on the ground," Perry said. "But

when you are shoved into a whirlpool, you learn a different kind of trust."

She said she never wanted her past to be revealed in such a public way

but maybe her story will help others.

"Let's remember that God's in charge," she said.

 

----

Two photos: one of Perry's books, the other of Perry. The first is captioned,

"Anne Perry, who lives in Scotland, has published 20 titles and has more than

3 million books in print in the United States alone. Her mysteries often

explore sin and redemption, something she is familiar with." The second is

captioned, "Anne Perry was 41 when she published her first mystery novel."

----

 

========================================

 

 

 

- END -

 

 

--------------684338DC2E2A--

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n063 ---------------

From heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com Wed Jul 10 01:02:48 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA11734 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 01:02:43 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id AAA06317; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 00:00:28 -0700

Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 00:00:28 -0700

Message-Id: <199607100700.AAA06317@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n064

BestServHost: lists.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n064 --------------

 

001 - kate ann jacobson <kjac@u - Re: Letters on Anne Perry

002 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - The Frighteners (fwd)

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n064.1 ---------------

 

From: kate ann jacobson <kjac@unm.edu>

Subject: Re: Letters on Anne Perry

Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 00:53:40 -0600 (MDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

 

That was fascinating, thanks Bao! She seems so honest and articulate,

I would love to hear her review of HC someday (even negative), or her

side of this story told with the same openness she talks about God.

But I did get to meet her actually, a few months ago at a talk and book

signing. Here are a few things she said:

 

** when asked what inspired her to make Charlotte Pitt such a

free-thinking woman, she said all women had, but mostly it

was her mother, Hilda!

 

** describes her brother Jonathan as someone who's had most of his

good ideas put into his head by women, but would never admit it

 

** said the inspiration for the eccentric "Aunt Vespasia" character

in the Pitt novels was her Auntie Ina from South Africa

 

** when some cheesehead in the audience asked her if she'd ever been

to a real trial, she paused a moment and said,"I don't usually sit

in on court procedure, but tape it from the television."

 

** lives in the same house with her secretary (didn't elaborate on

whether anything romantic)

 

** when speaking of Bill Perry, twice she said, "My father - I mean

stepfather....."

 

** made a lot of comments about her age, like, "My age is a number

and it's unlisted," "I've been 45 for a few years," "Aunt

Vespasia hasn't aged a day in 15 years and neither will I."

** quoted Hilda's favorite expression, which is "You can do a lot

more with honey than with vinegar" (in influencing people)

 

** when the back cover of someone's book, with her picture on it, was

facing her from the front row, she said, "Oh, could you turn

that over, please. I hate looking at pictures of myself!" and

made a face that looked just like Kate Winslet "taking her seat"

in the Windsors scene.

 

Can't wait for the fantasy trilogy!

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n064.2 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: The Frighteners (fwd)

Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 00:24:03 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 1061

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Forwarded message:

> From lelak@sydney.healey.com.au Mon Jul 8 22:58:23 1996

> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 15:59:48 +1000 (GMT+1000)

> From: Lela Kaunitz <lelak@sydney.healey.com.au>

> To: bryanw@666.org

> Subject: The Frighteners

> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960709155702.7300A-100000@sydney.healey.com.au>

> MIME-Version: 1.0

> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

>

>

> in all the hoo-ha about there being characters in the frighteners called

> "lynskey", did anyone happen to mention sheriff Walt Perry as well?

>

> "Please... call me Bill."

>

> Lela

>

> ps. bryan, can you pls fwd above to the list? i think it's that i'm using

> pine, where i subscribed via eudora...

> did this letter arrive from sydney.healey.com.au or just healey.com.au?

>

> - L

>

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel, bryan woodworth

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryanw@borovnia.666.org

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 PGP Public Key obtainable

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/ via finger: bryanw@best.com

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n064 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com Thu Jul 11 04:06:41 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA01135 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:06:36 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id EAA18954; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:00:59 -0700

Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:00:59 -0700

Message-Id: <199607111100.EAA18954@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n065

BestServHost: lists.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n065 --------------

 

001 - Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@6 - Announcements -- dear readers

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n065.1 ---------------

 

From: Bryan Woodworth <bryanw@666.org>

Subject: Announcements -- dear readers

Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 03:49:15 -0700 (PDT)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Content-Length: 2000

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Hello!

 

 

 

WEEKLY VIDEO CLIPS

 

 

Don't forget, even though I do not always update the NEWSTUFF, there is a

weekly MPEG clip!

 

This week it is the opening from the HC film, with the "It's mummy! She's

terribly hurt!" line.

 

Lamentably, no sound. (I can rectify this if someone wants to donate a

grabber for video AND sound..) :-)

 

P.S. -- SPECIAL TIP FOR 'HC' MAILING LIST SUBSCRIBERS!!! You may

access old MPEGs via this URL

 

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/heavenlyclip/alt/

 

 

Shh!! top secret!!! :-)

 

 

LIFE

 

 

I'm very sorry that I haven't updated HeavenlyWeb lately. I've been busy

living life! Sorry to be so lame about not updating the site. I hope to

be able to keep the site interesting over the coming months. Thanks to

all for their support!

 

 

THE MAILING LIST

 

 

I have no worries whatsoever about the list! While the list has been

low in traffic lately, that is ok. I'm sure it will pick up as ideas and

insights warrant.

 

 

MELANIE LYNSKEY WISH LIST

 

 

I have 5 requests of Melanie Lynskey for '96:

 

1. Make another movie!

2. Make another movie!

3. Make another movie!

4. Make another movie!

5. Make another movie!

 

I am devastated to see that Melanie hasn't made another film yet. It's

such a waste, to see people like Juliette Lewis making lots of films,

when they seem not to have as much talent and intensity. Please, Melanie!

I hope you find the perfect script soon.

 

P.S. -- If any Juliette Lewis fans are insulted.. I'm not sorry! :-)

Just kidding. Perhaps I used a bad example. Ok, how about, Madonna in

films? "What a waste!" Or, "Soleil Moon Frye in films! What a waste!"

(Soleil was in "Punky Brewster," some lame sitcom that Americans will find

dreadfully familiar..)

 

Bye for now!

 

b

 

 

--

"'Tis indeed a miracle, one must feel, bryan woodworth

that two such heavenly creatures are real." bryanw@borovnia.666.org

-- "Heavenly Creatures," 1994 PGP Public Key obtainable

http://www.reflection.org/heavenly/ via finger: bryanw@best.com

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n065 ---------------

 

From heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com Sun Jul 14 09:01:00 1996

Received: from lists1.best.com (lists1.best.com [206.86.8.15]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA22913 for <bryanw@shellx.best.com>; Sun, 14 Jul 1996 09:00:59 -0700

From: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Received: (root@localhost) by lists1.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id JAA28153; Sun, 14 Jul 1996 09:00:45 -0700

Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 09:00:45 -0700

Message-Id: <199607141600.JAA28153@lists1.best.com>

Subject: Digest heavenly-c.v001.n066

BestServHost: lists.best.com

Sender: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Errors-To: heavenly-c-errors@lists.best.com

Reply-To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

To: heavenly-c@lists.best.com

Status: RO

 

 

-------------- BEGIN heavenly-c.v001.n066 --------------

 

001 - mailcall <mailcall@kiva.n - Re: Letters on Anne Perry

002 - mailcall <mailcall@kiva.n - Heavenly MUSH

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n066.1 ---------------

 

From: mailcall <mailcall@kiva.net>

Subject: Re: Letters on Anne Perry

Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 10:21:08 -0500 (EST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

: ** when the back cover of someone's book, with her picture on it,

: was facing her from the front row, she said, "Oh, could you turn

: that over, please. I hate looking at pictures of myself!" and

: made a face that looked just like Kate Winslet "taking her seat"

: in the Windsors scene.

 

you know what's funny? there is and has always been on every book by

anne, a picture of her along with the usual publishers' blurb. this

picture looks to me exactly, but *exactly*, like kate winslet's

reaction to "i think your drawing's fantastic!" if i had not known

that she was juliet before seeing this picture, i would have

recognized her instantly. "it's SO OBVIOUS!" apparently a lot of

people in the publishing world and elsewhere did know for many years,

it was almost an open secret.

 

**--==--** melanthe alexian **--==--**

 

 

 

 

--------------- MESSAGE heavenly-c.v001.n066.2 ---------------

 

From: mailcall <mailcall@kiva.net>

Subject: Heavenly MUSH

Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 10:27:54 -0500 (EST)

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 

i want to go on adding to the mush environment. i am doing borovnia

and port levy next. for port levy i need to know how far it was and

in which direction from ilam, and a description of what it is like and

how it is laid out. i will see st boffin today and maybe we'll work

on girls' high this evening. he will need floor plans to create it

exactly. please to let me know if there is anything special you want

to see in the mush.

 

also, i have been getting email from people having trouble connecting.

purple.cow.net 8888 has been going down a lot. the techs know it is

happening and are working on trying to fix it. if you cannot connect,

try later. they bring it back up as quickly as possible when it

crashes.

 

**--==--** on the good ship lollipop! **--==--**

**--==--** melanthe alexian **--==--**

 

 

 

 

--------------- END heavenly-c.v001.n066 ---------------