Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
LBCF, No. 144: ‘Two Swell Guys’

LBCF, No. 144: ‘Two Swell Guys’

Last updated on: July 21, 2017 at 7:40 am by Fred Clark

LBCF, No. 144: ‘Two Swell Guys’ 2017-07-18T18:54:57-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Originally posted December 28, 2007.

Read this entire series, for free, via the convenient Left Behind Index. This post is also part of the ebook collection The Anti-Christ Handbook: Volume 1, available on Amazon for just $2.99. I have a theory that boilerplate text becomes invisible. Volume 2 of The Anti-Christ Handbook, completing all the posts on the first Left Behind book, is also now available.

Left Behind, pp. 381-384

Rayford Steele is a massively deluded creature. We’ve just seen this painfully illustrated, yet again, in his long prophecy sales pitch to Hattie Durham. Throughout that conversation Rayford comes across as a controlling, self-centered, inarticulate jerk wholly devoid of empathy. Yet in every other paragraph of that section we’re also told that he perceives himself as a paragon of “passion and persuasion,” and that this is how he thinks others perceive him as well.

This portrayal of Rayford’s utter lack of self-awareness does not seem to be deliberate. It appears to be a simple case of authors who are incapable of self-criticism and therefore incapable of presenting self-critical or self-aware characters. Yet Rayford’s misreading of his own thoughts and actions is so flagrantly over-the-top that it seems impossible it’s wholly unintentional. Consider the opening sentence of the next Rayford-POV passage:

Rayford thought his daughter looked stunning that evening, and he wondered what the magazine writer thought of her. Clearly this Williams guy was too old for her. Rayford had spent his free hours before dinner napping and then praying that he would have the same courage and clarity he’d had with Hattie. …

Rayford silently judges Buck as “too old” and in the very next sentence we are reminded that he is, himself, old enough to have spent the afternoon napping. All this occurs while he sits across the table from Hattie, his recently jilted non-lover who is 15 or 20 years his junior. Rayford is oblivious to the irony here, but is it really possible that the authors are as well?

It may be helpful here to remember that Left Behind’s dual protagonists also serve as wish-fulfillment surrogates for the book’s dual authors. Manly, attractive airline pilot Rayford Steele is Tim LaHaye’s Mary Sue stand-in, and jet-setting, award-winning journalist Buck Williams embodies the fantasy of Jerry Jenkins. I’m not privy to any inside information about LaHaye and Jenkins’ relationship, but their “co-writing” arrangement does not involve an equal workload. LaHaye provides a broad outline and the marquee name that propels sales, but Jenkins is the one who actually has to apply the seat of his pants to the seat of his chair until he has applied all of the words to the page. So Jenkins supplies 90 percent of the heavy lifting for a 50-percent share of the profits. One can’t help but wonder if such an arrangement doesn’t produce a bit of resentment on Jenkins’ part, and if that resentment might not manifest itself, occasionally, in his portrayal of Rayford/LaHaye as a preening, self-absorbed, clueless ass.

That might account for scenes like this but it wouldn’t explain why Jenkins’ own surrogate, Buck Williams, is often portrayed in a similar fashion. So as amusing as it is to speculate that Rayford’s delusional self image is Jenkins’ subtle, intentional dig at his pompous co-author, I don’t think it’s the case. The simpler explanation seems more likely: Very Bad Writing.

TwoGuys

We’re told that Rayford is eager to repeat his sales pitch — “his new mission in life” — for Buck and Chloe, but what we see instead is a man basking in the opportunity to play Big Shot at an upscale restaurant. As always, he carefully restrains himself from any display of warmth or affection toward Hattie:

Rayford … had said nothing about Hattie’s new look for the evening, but that was by design. She was striking and always had been, but he was not going down that path again.

He’s never been “down that path” before, and the only conceivable reason Hattie showed up, dressed to the nines, is that she wants to underscore that her, um, path is someplace he’ll only get to go down in his dreams. That’s lost on Rayford, who’s only ever interested in playing his little games “by design.”

During dinner Rayford kept the conversation light …

One wonders what passes for light dinner conversation eight days after the onset of the apocalypse. The weather is out, since Rosenzweig’s “electromagnetism” theory about the disappearances would have everyone on edge about the prospect of a lightning storm anywhere in the world. Sports wouldn’t seem like a safe topic either (“Ewing’s game hasn’t been the same since his kids disappeared …”). And asking anyone about their family would be a Pandora’s box likely to end in uncontrollable sobbing.

The authors don’t provide any of this conversation, of course, sticking with their rule that dialogue should rarely be used to develop character or advance the plot. But while Buck, Hattie and Chloe don’t have any lines in this scene, the waiter has two:

After dinner, Rayford spoke to the waiter privately. “We’d like to spend another hour or so here, if it’s all right.””Sir, we do have an extensive reservation list –”

“I wouldn’t want this table to be less than profitable for you,” Rayford said, pressing a large bill into the waiter’s palm, “so boot us out whenever it becomes necessary.”

The waiter peeked at the bill and slipped it into his pocket. “I’m sure you will not be disturbed,” he said. And the water glasses were always full.

It’s all about the Hamiltons baby. I take it we’re supposed to be impressed with the smoothness of Rayford’s rico suave routine here, but all I could think was that he’s an evangelical and — ask anybody in the restaurant biz — evangelicals are notoriously lousy tippers. Plus they’re teetotallers (“water glasses” indeed), so they’re leaving a precise 10 percent on an already smaller bill.

An aside for my evangelical brothers and sisters: “The scripture saith, thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The laborer is worthy of his reward” (I Timothy 5:18). So tip 20 percent. At least. Divide by five and round up. If you also plan to: A) say grace aloud before the meal; B) ask your server if he/she is “saved;” and/or C) leave a gospel tract on the table when you leave, then make that 40 percent.

We switch back to Buck’s point of view and get a glimpse of the difference between the two men. While the Rayford-POV section was all about what a great guy Rayford is, the Buck-POV section is all about what great guys both of them are:

Buck tried to concentrate on the captain’s answers but felt himself trying to impress Chloe, too. Everyone in the business knew he was one of the best in the world at interviewing. That and his ability to quickly sift through the stuff and make a readable, engaging article of it had made him who he was. Buck had breezed through the preliminaries, and he liked this guy. Steele seemed honest and sincere, smart and articulate. He realized he had seen a lot of Rayford in Chloe.

Consider that paragraph alongside this one:

Whether you’re interested in poetry or prose, fiction or nonfiction, you’ll hone your skills and polish your craft, working alongside one of the Guild’s Master Craftsman.

That’s from the site touting Jenkins’ “Christian Writers Guild Writing Course.” For only $1,365 you, too, can learn to flesh out your characters by piling on the superlatives and adjectives. How will your readers know that your hero is “honest and sincere, smart and articulate” unless you tell them?

With all of the “preliminaries” out of the way, Buck is set to ask about Rayford’s theory of The Event. The build-up here seems more like he’s about to propose marriage:

“I’m ready,” he said, “to ask your idea of what happened on that fateful flight to London. Do you have a theory?” The captain hesitated and smiled as if gathering himself. “I have more than a theory,” he said. “You may think this sounds crazy coming from a technically minded person like me, but I believe I have found the truth and know exactly what happened.” …

“Here’s your chance to tell the world.”

This is Rayford’s big moment — his chance to lay out the whole End Times Prophecy Gospel in all its glory not just for Buck and “the world,” but for his daughter and for Hattie (again, since it didn’t seem to take the first time). But just then …

Chloe chose that moment to gently touch Buck’s arm and ask if he minded if she excused herself for a moment.”I’ll join you,” Hattie said.

This occurs without explanation. They’re gone for about half an hour, we’re told, which seems a bit long for powdering one’s nose. Did they sneak away for a cigarette at the bar? Did they skim ahead in the script and, realizing that neither of them has any lines in this scene, head off to the green room? Or did they just decide that they couldn’t bear sitting through several more pages of unsupported assertions about how talented, sincere and likable Buck and Rayford are? We’re never told.

The women’s departure was not “by design,” leaving Rayford “privately frustrated, almost to the point of anger.” Buck asks him why they left and he says, “I assure you that is not the case” — a non-sequitur that suggests his prayers for clarity are not being answered:

He couldn’t slow down and wait for their return. The question had been asked, he felt ready, and so he stepped off the edge of a social cliff, saying things he knew could get him categorized as a kook. As he had done with Hattie, he outlined his own spotty spiritual history and brought Williams up to the present in a little over half an hour, covering every detail he felt was relevant. At some point the women returned.

One question from Buck produces a 40-minute uninterrupted monologue from Rayford. Yep, without a doubt, he’s “one of the best in the world at interviewing.”

I had expected Left Behind would, like most “Christian novels,” (“Christian” there being a marketing term) include long, preachy, didactic sections — whole chapters of sermonizing. I suppose I’m grateful to have been spared that, but it turns out there’s something even worse. Here in Left Behind we’re constantly being told about such sermons, and about how passionate, persuasive, honest and sincere they are, but we never learn what was actually said.

Here’s how LaHaye & Jenkins’ account of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount would have read:

Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, and he began to teach them. When Jesus had finished, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority.

Come to think of it, that’s also how they seem to read this passage themselves.

Uncategorized

Left Behind

Previous Post

July 20, 2017

'Perhaps a year, maybe a little more'

Next Post

July 23, 2017 Theology, history, and context

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many musicians were used in Temple worship?

Select your answer to see how you score.

250 288 200 300