L.B.: Late-night phone calls

Left Behind, pp. 288-292

Rayford Steele is regretting his bizarre behavior on the phone with Hattie Durham.

If only he'd been more suave or more subtle in his seduction proselytizing, "She'd have been none the wiser and he could have eased into his real reason for inviting her to dinner." And then two sentences later: "His real motive, even for talking with Hattie, was to communicate to Chloe."

There's something odd, and maybe a little creepy, about Rayford's notion of evangelism. It seems to involve a lot of making sure that his "real" motives and reasons are kept hidden so that others are "none the wiser." Kind of the Amway approach.

Rayford can't sleep, so even though it's after midnight he calls up the Rev. Bruce Barnes to vent. Here's another inadvertent bit of realism: Even when 99 percent of the congregation has been raptured, the pastor is still going to have to deal with phone calls in the middle of the night from the remaining 1 percent.

"It's really hard when it's your own daughter."

"I can imagine," Bruce said.

"No, you can't," Rayford said.

Rayford hangs up, and since he's no longer on the phone, we return to Buck & Nicky.

It's well after 1 a.m. in Chaim Rosenzweig's "beautiful suite of rooms" at the Plaza. "You do not mind my calling you Buck, do you?" Carpathia says. "They call you that because you buck the traditions and the trends and the conventions."

This repeats, nearly verbatim, the explanation of Buck's nickname from way back on page 6. He's the Dirty Harry of journalism, the renegade maverick who plays by his own rules, etc. In the intervening 280+ pages we've seen little evidence to support this characterization. Ignoring his deadline for the cover story on a global cataclysm might technically count as "bucking" journalistic convention, I suppose, in the same way that his craven willingness to drop his story in order to save his own hide bucks the conventions of "crusading journalist" stories, but I doubt that's what the authors had in mind.

Buck and Carpathia begin their late-night conversation in this hotel room and it reads like, well, like a late-night conversation in a hotel room:

"It is amazing, is it not, that all those different international meetings right here in New York over the next few weeks are all about the worldwide cooperation in which I am interested?"

"It is," Buck said. "And I've been assigned to cover them."

"Then we will be getting to know each other better."

"I look forward to that, sir. I was most moved at the U.N. today."

"Thank you."

"And Dr. Rosenzweig has told me so much about you."

"As he has told me much about you."

There was a knock at the door. Carpathia looked pained. "I had hoped we would not be disturbed."

Phew. Was it getting hot in there, or was it just me?

The interruption occurred because the president of the United States is on the phone, calling for Carpathia. The president apparently spent his day the same way everyone else did — watching CSPAN coverage of Nicolae's U.N. speech and then watching the Nightline interview. And at 1:30 in the morning, he decided to call the Romanian president. Carpathia puts him on speaker:

"Mr. Carpathia, this is Fitz. Gerald Fitzhugh."

"Mr. President, I am honored to hear from you."

"Well, hey, it's good to have you here!"

"I appreciated your note of congratulations on my presidency, sir, and your immediate recognition of my administration."

"Boy, that was a heckuva thing, how you took over there. I wasn't sure what had happened at first, but I don't suppose you were either."

"That is exactly right. I am still getting used to it."

"Well, take it from a guy who's been in the saddle for six years. You don't ever get used to it. You just develop calluses in the right places, if you know what I mean."

When introducing the president as a character in a work of fiction you have to decide whether or not to base the character on a real-life person. LaHaye & Jenkins opted not to — probably due to the fact that in order for him to still be in office their president would have to have missed the rapture. Even so, it's interesting that they did not base "President Fitzhugh" on the man who was in office in 1995, Bill Clinton. Even though Clinton is a church-going, Bible-quoting Southern Baptist married to a church-going, Bible-quoting United Methodist, I'm pretty sure L&J wouldn't consider either of them to be genuine, rapture-eligible Real True Chrisitians.

"Fitz" isn't based on Clinton, or on any of his immediate predecessors. But with his desperation to project an air of cowboy manliness and his folksy pretension ("that was a heckuva thing") he does almost seem to foreshadow the man who succeeded Clinton.

We get a few more paragraphs of Fitz's backslappin' bonhomie — "I want you to spend a night or two here with me and Wilma. … Right here at the White House" — and the president signs off.

Buck was only a little less overcome than Carpathia and Rosenzweig. He had long since lost his awe of U.S. presidents, especially this one, who insisted on being called Fitz. He had done a Newsmaker of the Year piece on Fitzhugh — Buck's first, Fitz's second. On the other hand, it wasn't every day that the president called the room in which you sat.

It may seem strange that this is the first, and only, mention of the American president in this book. The Fitzhugh administration's response to The Event and its aftermath are never discussed. Nor is there any mention of the American president's reaction to the divine obliteration of the entire Russian arsenal and air force, which also occurred during Fitz's time "in the saddle."

The problem here, for L&J, is that the PMD End Times master plan has very little to say about America's role in the final days. This is the source of endless hand-wringing on the part of Bible "prophecy" enthusiasts. Variations of "What does the Bible say about America's role in the End Times?" are among the most frequently asked questions at LeftBehind.com.

Their answer, such as it is, seems to be that America's only role is maintain loyal support for Israel (the political state, not the people). Just like God, they say, we must stand by Israel, ensuring that it prospers right up until the end of the world (at which point, of course, it will be utterly destroyed because, you know, they're Jews and not RTCs).

One byproduct of this answer is the unlikely alliance of America's Christian right with the most hawkish Israeli factions. CBS News' Bob Simon provides a good rundown of this dynamic in his report, "Zion's Christian Soldiers."

Simon, unfortunately, repeats unchallenged L&J's indefensible claim that their complex and selectively allegorical interpretive scheme is based on reading the Bible "literally." He characterizes the plot of Left Behind as "ripped from the pages of the Bible." It's nothing of the sort. The authors, instead, have ripped up the pages of the Bible and then reassembled some of the pieces to form an arbitrary, convoluted and internally inconsistent timeline.

Apart from that regrettable lapse, Simon's report is an excellent summary of how the World's Worst Books are influencing American foreign policy, and of why America's rapture maniacs may not really be the best "best friends" for Israel to rely on. On the latter point, Simon quotes Gershom Gorenberg:

“The Jews die or convert. As a Jew, I can’t feel very comfortable with the affections of somebody who looks forward to that scenario,” says Gershom Gorenberg, who knows that scenario well.

Gorenberg is the author of The End of Days, a book about those Christian evangelicals who choose to read the Bible literally. “They don’t love real Jewish people. They love us as characters in their story, in their play, and that’s not who we are, and we never auditioned for that part, and the play is not one that ends up good for us.”

“If you listen to the drama they’re describing, essentially it’s a five-act play in which the Jews disappear in the fourth act.”

  • cjmr’s husband

    BTW, the kids just informed me that “male cars have bright colors that they display during mating season.”
    Such is the danger of trying to identify that bird in the yard while the kids are playing with cars.

  • SueW

    I’m starting to wonder whether the authors have ever been Amway salesmen.

  • Zingo Stertch

    Is it just me or does this line, “…especially this one, who insisted on being called Fitz.” imply Buck doesn’t think much of this president in particular because he makes people call him by a stupid nickname? Projection; it isn’t just for movie theaters.

  • Hasimir Fenring

    Because for all his great faith, he doesn’t believe Jesus can save her unless he personally gets her to convert Right Now.
    Well, it has to be Right Now. If Chloe gets hit by a bus or chokes to death on an olive before she Finds Jesus, she gets a One-Way Ticket to HELL. It’s yet another wrinkle in the twisted circle of Say-the-Magic-Words Christianity. (I think I mixed up my metaphors a bit there.)
    It reminds me of the day the South Park boys first learned about confession. Kenny is run over on his way to confession, so it’s Hell for him.
    A bit off-topic, but any Catholics out there: If an Act of God kills you on your way to confession, do you still burn in the proper location for those un-confessed sins? After all, you were going to confess like He wanted, and He stopped you….

  • cjmr’s husband

    @Hasimir,
    That’s one of the things Purgatory covers, unless I am gravely mistaken and in deep trouble.

  • mds

    Considering that Carpathia got both Worldwide conspiracy and Santanic power to get info form Buck it’s a wonder that the point of trivia he thought the more interesting.
    Carpathia: I believe you often wear shoes to work, Buck?
    Williams: *Gasp!*
    Boy, this Nicolae is really smooth. He’s one of the two or three people who actually uses Buck’s nickname (I mean, even his old buddy in England wouldn’t call him “Buck.”) No wonder Williams is in love with him. In fact, from L&J’s point of view, Carpathia would be a great Christian missionary: seductive and a liar.
    That’s one of the things Purgatory covers, unless I am gravely mistaken and in deep trouble.
    Oh, I guarantee that you’re both. We all are.

  • Funky Shoes

    No Jews in Heaven. Jesus was a Jew. Hmmmm.

  • jxl

    But through the wonders of modern psychiatry, Jesus came to really believe in himself.

  • the opoponax

    Does Clinton really get tarred with “gluttony” because people once joked about his penchant for Big Macs? that doesn’t seem fair, really. i mean, a lot of people like Big Macs. “Billions and Billions Served”, remember? (i don’t think they were all to Clinton, either). i thought with the 7 deadlies, it had to be an above-and-beyond thing? having a crush one someone isn’t lust. spending saturday afternoon on the couch, channel surfing, isn’t sloth. liking the occasional junk food spree isn’t gluttony. that said, i’m not a christian and especially not a catholic, so i could be mistaken there.

  • The Old Maid

    Tsk, tsk. People caught the tweak from Rock-e-feller to Ston-a-gal, but you didn’t catch Wilma? Fitz=JFitzgeraldK, Gerald=Gerald Ford, Mrs. Gerald a.k.a. The First Lady=Betty, Betty Rubble’s best friend=Wilma.
    Rayford’s parenting style with Chloe may be including a belief that she still needs more parenting. Compare to Cendrillon’s parents (not in this volume) who had 100 years to get her saved, and they didn’t, because they simply assumed, and assumed wrong. (BTW, the only reference I’ve seen to the reason for her non-resurrection is near the end of that book, when Rayford muses that if someone killed him, he would pop up resurrected on the spot; ergo, if the child didn’t stand up on the spot, she’s really gone. Now, did they mention that earlier in the book and I simply missed that page? I’m going back to look for it, but which chapter?)

  • Erick Oppeen

    Re: The Clintons and the Seven Deadlies
    The reports I heard about Bill and Hill’s relationship mention them both giving in to Wrath, pretty regularly. As for Sloth…mmm, maybe they deserve a pass on that one.
    Question: Is it possible to be left-of-center and not reflexively defend the Clintons? I know, a lot of their accusers were pretty unpleasant people…but I know quite a few right-wing types who had/have no use for either Nixon or W, and many of them have Problems even with Reagan, if only for his Faustian bargain with the Falwell crowd. The Clintons were both pretty dishonest people, and had that reputation long before they got to the White House. He wasn’t called “Slick Willie” because he rubbed down every day with Vaseline.

  • the opoponax

    the funny thing, Erick, is i don’t much care for either of them.
    but i do care about intellectual honesty, and it does bother me the degree to which right wingers spread lies about them. if the right was just straight up and said things like “How dare Bill Clinton grow up working class with a single mom and grow up to totally eviscerate the welfare system?!” or “Hillary Clinton has no convictions and stands for nothing”, i’d be all for it. but they are too busy making up crazy bullshit about how The Clintons Have Committed Every Single One Of The Seven Deadly Sins, which is both untrue and irrelevant.
    not to mention, y’know, the right tends to have a problem with that whole “plank in thine eye” idea — so far i haven’t come up with a single right-wing politician who wasn’t guilty of the very things he or she accused a Clinton of. what was it someone upthread said? “Projection: it’s not just for movie theaters anymore.”
    also, he was called “slick Willie” by people like Rush Limbaugh. this is relevant how, exactly?

  • FungiFromYuggoth

    Erick Oppeen – the Left, as a general rule, has grave issues with both Hillary and Bill Clinton. These issues tend to be confined to actual policies, such as NAFTA, welfare deform, the Iraq War, etc.
    I’m confident that the fact what that you see as “reflexive defensiveness” from left-of-center people is really a reflection on how extreme and reality-divorced your comments are.

  • Hagsrus

    “Power of Pride!” bumper sticker — what does this promote?

  • cjmr’s husband

    “Power of Pride!” attached to an American flag. The connotation is “I’m proud to be an American, because we’re invading the wrong country! USA! USA! USA!”

  • cjmr

    i thought with the 7 deadlies, it had to be an above-and-beyond thing? having a crush one someone isn’t lust. spending saturday afternoon on the couch, channel surfing, isn’t sloth. liking the occasional junk food spree isn’t gluttony. that said, i’m not a christian and especially not a catholic, so i could be mistaken there.
    Not at all mistaken. Having a crush on someone isn’t lust. Becoming so obsessed with someone that thoughts of them take your every waking hour, you transform your room into a shrine to them, and you live solely for each time they look at you and speak your name–that would be lust. Doesn’t even have to be consummated.

  • the opoponax

    “”Power of Pride!” attached to an American flag. The connotation is “I’m proud to be an American, ”
    in line with a thread going on at Pandagon, oh, i oh so desperately want to cover the American flags on those bumper stickers with the Queer Rainbow… i should find a picture of one right now so that i can get the dimensions of the flag and be prepared with the properly sized rainbow flag sticker…

  • A Texan in Bavaria

    “Power of Pride!” bumper sticker — what does this promote?
    I so wanted to print up rainbow-striped overlays for the “patriotic” flag bit on those stickers.
    I’m proud to have resisted my inner 14 year old.

  • A Texan in Bavaria

    Opoponax: we have some sort of strange mind-meld going on.

  • Criada

    Gerald FitzHugh and Hugh FitzGerald? That sounds like an joke I once knew…
    Ack, I just read that one in a pun-tastic Lawrence Block novel. Now I feel all sticky. If L+J actually stuck in a Block reference, I’d love them in a wierd way, but given the context… but maybe their inner sides are unconsciously clawing out of their shiny prisons.

  • Alan

    “Question: Is it possible to be left-of-center and not reflexively defend the Clintons?”
    As a general rule, no, because the people who reflexively attack the Clintons almost invariably do so for mendacious reasons. Bill Clinton eats too much … according to Rush Limbaugh. Bill Clinton was immoral because of his affair with Monica … according to Newt Gingrich, who was also having an affair. The list goes on. Bill Clinton would have been impeached ten times over if he’d done half the things that Bush has done and for which the Right has praised him repeatedly.
    Personally, I’m well aware of the Clintons’ individual flaws and frankly hope that Hillary does not become the Democratic nominee (although, of course, I’ll vote for a potted plant before I ever support a Republican). But compared to the moral and ethical cesspit that is the GOP, I think Bill and Hillary are shining paragons of decency.

  • Forest Pines

    Is there any chance that GWB’s folksiness was inspired, directly or indirectly, by Fitzhugh’s?

  • Alan

    Oh, and wrt “Wilma,” the name isn’t that much worse than Hattie, especially for a First Lady (Nancy, Rosalynd, Betty, Mamie, etc.). Hmm, Wilma, Betty? Gerald Fitzhugh, Gerald Ford? Is it possible that L&J have some animus against Gerald R. Ford?

  • Dean Booth

    “The Clintons were both pretty dishonest people.”
    Twelve years of propaganda, from both the right-wing and MSM, has done its work. And then there’s Gore, with his fancy $10 words! He’s not only pretentious and boring, he’s sooooooo fat!
    And hundreds of thousands have died.

  • Hysterical Woman

    “I hear they call you Buck because you like to…”
    I’m just surprise no one has done that yet.

  • Cactus Wren

    “You do not mind my calling you Buck, do you?” Carpathia says. “They call you that because … well, there are many stories about how you came to be called Buck.”
    One of his hands had crept around Buck’s waist. “Is it true that you once inadvertently threw Steve Plank right off a king-size bed?”

  • cjmr’s husband

    Re: Gerald Ford
    If L&J had been intentionally targeting Ford, the president would have been President Harold Dodge. Or perhaps Perry Chevrolet.
    As it happens, “Fitz Hugh” sounds like an eighth-grade dirty joke name, a bit below their usual Adult Film standards.

  • mcc

    Erick Oppeen – the Left, as a general rule, has grave issues with both Hillary and Bill Clinton…
    …As a general rule, no, because the people who reflexively attack the Clintons almost invariably do so for mendacious reasons.
    I actually get hit by both these effects and wind up finding myself reflexively defending AND attacking the Clintons, sometimes at the same time. It is confusing :(

  • Deoridhe

    Question: Is it possible to be left-of-center and not reflexively defend the Clintons?
    Question, is it possible to be right-of-center and not reflexively mentally masturbate to two Democrates while ignoring most of the rest of the left?
    Next you’ll imply everyone left of center got their debate points from bloody Michael Moore.