{"id":1928,"date":"2009-01-17T13:57:16","date_gmt":"2009-01-17T13:57:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/"},"modified":"2015-05-28T17:31:49","modified_gmt":"2015-05-28T21:31:49","slug":"mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/","title":{"rendered":"LBTM: No love for Hattie"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

Mrs. Cameron doesn\u2019t approve of Hattie Durham\u2019s behavior here and she doesn\u2019t want viewers to approve of it either.<\/p>\n

That disapproval is evident here. And because we can see that disapproval, we can also see the person doing the disapproving \u2014 the actress Chelsea Noble. And since there isn\u2019t room here for both the actress and the character, Hattie gets squeezed out. We can\u2019t glean whatever it was that motivated Hattie to go to Rayford\u2019s house and beg\/threaten\/negotiate for their future in this scene, because the only motivation we see here is Chelsea\u2019s, not Hattie\u2019s.<\/p>\n

This is part of why actors so often say that they won\u2019t or can\u2019t or mustn\u2019t judge the characters they play. It\u2019s almost impossible to decide that you approve or disapprove of the character or the character\u2019s actions without conveying that approval or disapproval instead of those actions. Such judgments can\u2019t be made to fit inside of the story you\u2019re trying to tell and they usually wind up taking both you and your audience outside of the story. This same judging afflicts Mr. Cameron\u2019s acting in LBTM as well. It\u2019s slightly less intrusive in his case because he regards Buck as a positive character, but it\u2019s still often obvious that this is what we are watching \u2014 not Buck Williams, but Kirk Cameron regarding Buck Williams with approval and asking us to share this approval.<\/p>\n

This story-destroying judgment of Hattie happens in the novel too, which is why neither the book nor the movie offers any credible explanation for the whole pseudo-affair between Hattie and Rayford. We\u2019re never shown or led to believe that either of these people loved or was capable of loving the other. Instead we\u2019re just told that they were sinning. And since the moral universe of LB requires that sin is always a deliberate, unambiguous act of willful disobedience, neither the book nor the movie ever allows for the possibility of any other motive for their affair. Thus we get this scene, which boils down to something like:<\/p>\n

HATTIE: I think we should go on sinning.RAYFORD: No. Sinning is bad.\n<\/div>\n

In all the history of sin and sinning, no two real sinners have ever had such a conversation.<\/p>\n

Hattie runs out and hops into a Jeep driven by a random chinless bearded guy. There\u2019s some kind of flashing light going on, so maybe he\u2019s supposed to be a military escort for U.N. Big Shot Hattie. But the Jeep looks more like the kind you\u2019d see parked outside a college dorm than like an official vehicle. If not an official driver, then, who is this guy? He agreed to come along and wait quietly in the car while Hattie ran inside to drop some ultimatums on her married\/newly widowered pseudo-boyfriend. There are very few non-creepy explanations for why any man would agree to do that.<\/p>\n

Back inside we have another half-decent interlude of father-daughter discussion. The dialogue isn\u2019t remarkable, but it\u2019s not remarkably bad either, which is an improvement on both the source material and on the preceding scene with Hattie.<\/p>\n

\u201cIs that why you never had time for us?\u201d Chloe asks, having overheard enough to figure out that something had been going on between her father and this woman who wasn\u2019t her mother.<\/p>\n

\u201cNo, that\u2019s not it at all,\u201d Rayford says.<\/p>\n

Tim LaHaye said that the inspiration for the Left Behind books came from seeing an airline pilot who wore a wedding ring flirting with a flight attendant. He described this for beliefnet<\/a>:<\/p>\n

I was flying across the country to a prophecy conference, and this handsome 40-ish airline pilot stepped out of the cabin and he started flirting with the chief stewardess in the galley there. I looked down and noticed that he had a wedding ring on, and I looked at her finger and she didn\u2019t have one on. I got to thinking, \u2018Oh, these people are pretty friendly.\u2019 And then I got to thinking \u2026 What if the Rapture took place?<\/div>\n

That\u2019s how LaHaye thinks. Any time he gets to thinking, it always<\/em> leads to this same thought: \u201cWhat if the Rapture took place right now?\u201d*<\/p>\n

LaHaye is fond of telling that story of about seeing the philandering pilot and thus getting inspired to write these books. It seems important to him. So it probably didn\u2019t please him that the screenwriters here say, \u201cNo, that\u2019s not it at all,\u201d and essentially concede that the whole Rayford\/Hattie subplot is a dead-end they don\u2019t want to waste any more time exploring. And it\u2019s just possible this was a factor in LaHaye\u2019s spending nine years in court<\/a> fighting for the rights to remake this film more to his liking. (Don\u2019t miss the comments in the article linked there.)<\/p>\n

Anyway this father\/daughter scene almost works. It works far better than the preceding bit with Hattie because Janaya Stephens \u2014 unlike Mr. & Mrs. CamCam \u2014 continues acting even when Chloe isn\u2019t the person talking.<\/p>\n

Rayford\u2019s comment here that he resented Irene\u2019s \u201cchurch stuff \u2026 because I didn\u2019t want her to need anything more than she needed me\u201d fits in nicely with \u2014 and could help to explain and humanize \u2014 the control-freak behavior of the Rayford we know from the book.<\/p>\n

\u201cAre you telling me that they\u2019re dead?\u201d Chloe asks, \u201cThat they\u2019re not coming back?\u201d These are, again, questions that everyone in this story should be asking, over and over.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey\u2019re not coming back, baby,\u201d Rayford says. Like LaHaye, he leaves unanswered the question of how \u201cnot coming back\u201d is in any meaningful way distinct from \u201cdead.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cYou mother left us with the truth,\u201d Rayford tells his daughter. That strikes me as more likely to succeed than the approach he takes in the book of nagging and begging Chloe to watch a videotape.<\/p>\n

The scene falls apart when Chloe asks, as she does in the book, about the sort of vindictive God who would carry out this merciless apocalypse and then, just like in the book, Rayford is unable to answer her.<\/p>\n

Back in Manhattan, CamCam is playing with a parakeet while the hippy chicks do all the heavy lifting on researching the conspiracy. Again, little here makes any sense at all. The elements of this conspiracy and how they supposedly tie together sounds like Ivy is playing MadLibs. And placing this scene immediately after the one with Chloe just underscores the deeply warped strangeness of these people sitting around not<\/em> asking the questions we\u2019ve heard from her: \u201cWhere are they? Are they dead? Are they coming back? What could be worse than this?<\/p>\n

Alan Tompkins calls. Movie-Alan is an FBI agent in Chicago instead of a Scotland Yard officer in London, but both Alans exist exclusively within the bubble of Buck\u2019s alternate-universe thriller subplot.<\/p>\n

The next scene is mandatory in any evangelical Christian movie. Chloe sits in a dimly lit room, pondering. Then she gets up and takes out a Bible \u2014 complete with a note from her saintly departed mother inscribed \u2014 and reads and ponders some more. (I was a bit surprised, though, that the folks at Tyndale House allowed so much screen time for the Teen Devotional Bible published by Zondervan.)<\/p>\n

A single-engine plane lands on a runway somewhere, but there\u2019s no location printed rat-a-tat on the screen so we
\ncan only guess where we are. I think it\u2019s Ken Ritz\u2019s plane, though, so we must still be within the 48 hours for which Buck hired him the day after the Event, which means we\u2019re at most three days into our story, even though we\u2019ve seen a week\u2019s worth of sunrises and sunsets and \u2026 oh, nevermind.<\/em><\/p>\n

We see CamCam and Alan in an otherwise almost-empty bar, presumably in Chicago. I\u2019d expect to see more people there due to the recent trauma and the fact that all the non-Muslim teetotallers have vanished, but it\u2019s just our heroes and a drunk lady who seems to have been written by some evangelical who\u2019s never actually set foot in a bar.<\/p>\n

Alan Tompkins is played here by Philip Akin, another Canadian** actor slumming for a paycheck. You may recognize him. Where exactly you recognize him from would reveal something about your taste in weekend and late night syndicated TV.<\/p>\n

They discuss the Event, but in a way that makes it seem abstract or like some kind of isolated occurrence in a small town far away. \u201cOfficially, it\u2019s radiation,\u201d Alan says. \u201cUnofficially, the agency\u2019s running scared from the top down.\u201d<\/p>\n

That, at least, is a recognition that even if the gullible population could be conned into believing the ludicrous \u201caccumulated radiation\u201d explanation, the officials knowingly spreading this cover story would remain, themselves, unsure of what happened or why or how or whether it might strike again at any moment.<\/p>\n

But the unexplained disappearance of 2 billion people doesn\u2019t for long distract Buck and Alan from the more pressing questions at hand: Who killed Dirk Burton and why?<\/p>\n

Alan gives CamCam yet another disc of information from Dirk, which he says is all, \u201cfinancial stuff\u201d having to do with a couple of bankers. Moments later, after an extravagantly furtive CamCam puts the pieces together and explains the conspiracy, Alan looks incredulous: \u201cYou mean it\u2019s all about money<\/em>?\u201d Yes, who could have guessed? The financial doings of international financiers wind up being all about money.<\/p>\n

The conspiracy itself \u2014 the maguffin the book never bothers to explain \u2014 has something to do with cornering the world market on food.<\/em> It involves trading a Temple for a formula and spending billions to bankrupt the U.N. in order to force the U.N. to give them the formula and 10 tracts of land. How the bankrupt U.N. is supposed to acquire that land or why it\u2019s involved at all in this scheme isn\u2019t really clear. (I\u2019m certain though that at some point in their scheming, Cothran asked why they didn\u2019t just use their billions of dollars to buy<\/em> the land, to which I\u2019m sure Stonagal replied, \u201cBecause that\u2019s just what they\u2019d expect<\/em> us to do.\u201d)<\/p>\n

That all makes little more sense than the hodge-podge of unexplained conspiring going on in the novel, but at least here Nicolae doesn\u2019t seem to be directly involved. He appears to be Stonagal\u2019s unwitting \u201cpuppet,\u201d rather than his willing accomplice, which lets movie-Buck deal with him later without having to agree, as book-Buck does, to help the conspiracy cover its tracks.<\/p>\n

CamCam agrees to go with Alan to a \u201csafe house\u201d until they figure out who killed Dirk but on their way to the car, he is detained by the alcoholic Sunday school teacher from inside, pleading for a dollar so she can go back in to finish getting her drink on. Alan gets in the car and, of course, boom<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The car bomb is much more convincing than the explosions earlier from the Russian missiles. The impact knocks CamCam over. He falls on his back, clutches his shin and begins bleeding from the thigh.<\/p>\n

Sinister Guy \u2014 the same one who shot out Dirk\u2019s monitor back in New York \u2014 peers out of a window and smiles. So, OK, he\u2019s been watching and now he\u2019s smiling, so this must be the outcome he was hoping for: Alan dead and Buck still alive. But that would mean the Sunday school teacher was working for him<\/em> \u2014 that he sent<\/em> her to prevent Buck from getting blown up in the car. We see a Significant Close-up of the old lady, but what that\u2019s supposed to mean I have no idea.<\/p>\n

The sun rises (Day 4?) on the Steele home, where CamCam, still bleeding, has fled for shelter. \u201cI\u2019m sorry to come here,\u201d he says. \u201cBut you\u2019re the only ones they don\u2019t know.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cMy friends are dead,\u201d he adds.<\/p>\n

Rayford and Chloe help CamCam to the couch, where he collapses, babbling. He\u2019d used the last of his strength, apparently, walking from downtown Chicago out to Wheaton.<\/p>\n

\u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013<\/p>\n

* It\u2019s hard to know what to make of LaHaye\u2019s \u201cwhat if\u201d scenario here. My reading of LaHaye\u2019s theology is that he believes born-again, real, true Christians get raptured and non-RTCs do not. So a born-again pilot would still get taken even if, at theat very moment the Rapture occurs, he and his chief flight attendant are renewing their membership in the Mile High Club. If, on the other hand, the pilot is not<\/em> born-again, then it won\u2019t help him any to have been wholly and unerringly faithful to his wife. A loyal husband non-RTC would still get left behind.<\/p>\n

The pilot\u2019s flirtation would seem to be irrelevant to the question of his status as saved or unsaved. \u201cFaith, not works\u201d is how LaHaye would put this.<\/p>\n

By asking \u201cWhat if the rapture took place?\u201d just as the pilot was flirting with the flight attendant, LaHaye seems to suggest he believes something else. That question seems to make salvation\/rapture conditional and tenuous \u2014 something like what Hamlet describes in \u201cNow might I do it pat.\u201d There Hamlet opts not to kill Claudius when he finds the wicked man on his knees, apparently at prayer, because he does not want Claudius to die in a state of grace:<\/p>\n

Up, sword; and know thou a more horrid hent:
\nWhen he is drunk asleep, or in his rage,
\nOr in the incestuous pleasure of his bed;
\nAt gaming, swearing, or about some act
\nThat has no relish of salvation in\u2019t;
\nThen trip him, that his heels may kick at heaven,
\nAnd that his soul may be as damn\u2019d and black
\nAs hell, whereto it goes.<\/div>\n

** While I was still chuckling over the Canadian provincial flags outside the \u201cUnited Nations\u201d in last week\u2019s installment, manfre e-mailed to note that, for anyone familiar with Toronto, it\u2019s obvious that Nicolae\u2019s U.N. office is not in Manhattan:<\/p>\n

The interior of the \u201cU.N.\u201d building in the Left Behind movie is being played by some east-facing room in the pointy-topped middle building of Toronto\u2019s Metro Hall complex, part of the city government offices and right next to the CBC broadcast building (the other two buildings in the Metro Hall complex are visible to the sides out the window behind CamCam). \u2026 And if you look at this view of downtown Toronto from Metro Hall<\/a> you\u2019ll see it\u2019s the same view that CamCam has in the background there. \u2026 [The filmmakers] try to pass off a view of Toronto that\u2019s obviously Toronto \u2026 as a view of midtown Manhattan. They might as well put the camera in the next building over so they can pan over to the CN Tower and Lake Ontario. \u2026<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mrs. Cameron doesn\u2019t approve of Hattie Durham\u2019s behavior here and she doesn\u2019t want viewers to approve of it either. That disapproval is evident here. And because we can see that disapproval, we can also see the person doing the disapproving \u2014 the actress Chelsea Noble. And since there isn\u2019t room here for both the actress […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":111,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[238],"class_list":["post-1928","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-left-behind","tag-left-behind"],"yoast_head":"\nLBTM: No love for Hattie<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Mrs. Cameron doesn't approve of Hattie Durham's behavior here and she doesn't want viewers to approve of it either. That disapproval is evident here. And\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"LBTM: No love for Hattie\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Mrs. Cameron doesn't approve of Hattie Durham's behavior here and she doesn't want viewers to approve of it either. That disapproval is evident here. And\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"slacktivist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-01-17T13:57:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-28T21:31:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Fred Clark\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Fred Clark\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/\",\"name\":\"LBTM: No love for Hattie\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-17T13:57:16+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-28T21:31:49+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e\"},\"description\":\"Mrs. Cameron doesn't approve of Hattie Durham's behavior here and she doesn't want viewers to approve of it either. That disapproval is evident here. And\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"LBTM: No love for Hattie\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/\",\"name\":\"slacktivist\",\"description\":\""Test everything; hold fast to what is good."\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e\",\"name\":\"Fred Clark\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg\",\"caption\":\"Fred Clark\"},\"description\":\"Fred Clark is a graduate of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary (now called Palmer Seminary), of Eastern College (now called Eastern University) and of the fundamentalist Timothy Christian High School (still fundamentalist and still called Timothy Christian High School, but not really thrilled to have a snarky, liberal, tree-hugging, pro-choice, pro-GLBT, peacenik, commie, evolutionist as such a vocal alumnus). A former managing editor of Prism magazine, Fred worked in the parachurch nonprofit world for a decade and then for a decade in the newspaper biz. He began blogging in 2002. In 2003 he began writing a review of the best-selling Left Behind series. Eight years later he still hasn\u2019t finished reviewing the second book of that series and the experience has left him a broken shell of a man. Fred knows the difference between the possessive \u201cits\u201d and the contraction \u201cit\u2019s,\u201d and he is acutely bothered when others mistakenly confuse the two, yet he himself just kind of instinctively types the apostrophe whether or not it belongs there. Some feel this is his greatest hypocrisy, but those who know him better know better. He\u2019s guilty of much greater hypocrisies. Jesus loves Fred far more than Fred loves Jesus, but he at least has the decency to recognize the unfairness of that lopsided relationship and he has long wished that he were better at maybe kind of sort of doing something more to correct that some day. A Baptist, an amateur, a Gen-Xer, a Gemini and a Mets fan, Fred lives in Southeastern Pennsylvania with his wife and two teenage daughters. You can reach him via email at slacktivist at hotmail dot com.\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/author\/fredclark\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"LBTM: No love for Hattie","description":"Mrs. Cameron doesn't approve of Hattie Durham's behavior here and she doesn't want viewers to approve of it either. That disapproval is evident here. And","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"LBTM: No love for Hattie","og_description":"Mrs. Cameron doesn't approve of Hattie Durham's behavior here and she doesn't want viewers to approve of it either. That disapproval is evident here. And","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/","og_site_name":"slacktivist","article_published_time":"2009-01-17T13:57:16+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-28T21:31:49+00:00","author":"Fred Clark","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Fred Clark","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/","name":"LBTM: No love for Hattie","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-01-17T13:57:16+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-28T21:31:49+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e"},"description":"Mrs. Cameron doesn't approve of Hattie Durham's behavior here and she doesn't want viewers to approve of it either. That disapproval is evident here. And","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2009\/01\/17\/mrs-cameron-doesnt-approve-of-hattie-durhams-behavior-here-and-she-doesnt-want-viewers-to-approve-of-it-eitherthat-disappro\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"LBTM: No love for Hattie"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/","name":"slacktivist","description":""Test everything; hold fast to what is good."","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e","name":"Fred Clark","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg","caption":"Fred Clark"},"description":"Fred Clark is a graduate of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary (now called Palmer Seminary), of Eastern College (now called Eastern University) and of the fundamentalist Timothy Christian High School (still fundamentalist and still called Timothy Christian High School, but not really thrilled to have a snarky, liberal, tree-hugging, pro-choice, pro-GLBT, peacenik, commie, evolutionist as such a vocal alumnus). A former managing editor of Prism magazine, Fred worked in the parachurch nonprofit world for a decade and then for a decade in the newspaper biz. He began blogging in 2002. In 2003 he began writing a review of the best-selling Left Behind series. Eight years later he still hasn\u2019t finished reviewing the second book of that series and the experience has left him a broken shell of a man. Fred knows the difference between the possessive \u201cits\u201d and the contraction \u201cit\u2019s,\u201d and he is acutely bothered when others mistakenly confuse the two, yet he himself just kind of instinctively types the apostrophe whether or not it belongs there. Some feel this is his greatest hypocrisy, but those who know him better know better. He\u2019s guilty of much greater hypocrisies. Jesus loves Fred far more than Fred loves Jesus, but he at least has the decency to recognize the unfairness of that lopsided relationship and he has long wished that he were better at maybe kind of sort of doing something more to correct that some day. A Baptist, an amateur, a Gen-Xer, a Gemini and a Mets fan, Fred lives in Southeastern Pennsylvania with his wife and two teenage daughters. You can reach him via email at slacktivist at hotmail dot com.","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/author\/fredclark\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1928","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/111"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1928"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1928\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1928"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1928"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1928"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}