In a new article in the Washington Monthly, Amy Sullivan relates a story about attending a neighborhood party comprised mainly of conservative evangelicals. Since Sullivan, who is both a Democrat and a “recovering-Baptist-turned-liberal-Episcopalian”, had recently read the first two books of Tim LaHaye's Left Behind series, she assumed she was sufficiently prepped to converse with the group:
There was just one problem. No one I talked to would admit to having read any of the books. A number of people conceded, "Oooh, yeah, my mom read those," wrinkling their noses and giving embarrassed shrugs. Several women offered that they had thought about reading the books after the former "Growing Pains" star, and heartthrob of our teen years, Kirk Cameron made a movie adaptation of the first installment. But after even some Christian publications panned the film, they had reconsidered.
I was surprised.
She claims it wasn’t the pre-trib theology or the right-tilting political slant of the books that was a turn-off. Instead, she found that the “real answer came from one woman who grimaced as she told me, ‘I heard they were really poorly written.’”
Indeed they are. Even if you agree with the dispensational theology espoused by the books (full disclosure: I don’t), the books themselves are almost unreadable. Yet enough evangelicals to fill a couple of hundred megachurches have read them. So how can we explain the fact that the series has sold 60 million copies?
Sullivan credits part of the reason to the increase of popular evangelicalism in America. But, she adds, there’s another explanation:
Millions of Christians, not all of them right-wing or even evangelical, have been devouring these badly written books, crackpot politics and all, because there is virtually no other entertaining Christian-themed fiction out there.
Sullivan deserves partial credit for that answer. To those outside the subculture it may appear as if there is a paucity of other alternatives. But anyone who has stepped into a Lifeway, Mardel’s, or Family Christian Stores can tell you that there is no shortage of “Christian” fiction to choose from. You could swing a dead cat in any of those stores and hit a novel that would be superior to LaHaye's apocalyptic potboilers.
But quality doesn’t always count for much, especially when it comes to pop culture. What is really driving the extraordinary sales of the books is not their literary merits but the genius of American marketing. Whether pushing caffeinated sugar water or conspiratorial fantasy films, no one on the planet can match the US’s ability to create a demand for products of specious value. It used to be said that good salesmen could sell ice to the Eskimos. Modern marketing is so savvy that they now salesmen could call that same ice “latte cooling cubes” and sell them at the Artic Starbucks for a dollar a pop.
Fred Clark, a fellow evangelical who occupies a pew on the Left, also takes issue with Sullivan’s argument and agrees with me that there is not a “dearth of mainstream ‘Christian-themed entertainment’.” He makes a great point in countering Sullivan’s contention that the golden age of Hollywood provided more options:
Sullivan cites the peak of Hollywood's sandal-epic period as the high-point in the availability of such entertainments in American culture (oddly including Spartacus in the list of biblical epics). These films were all released, keep in mind, back in the days when evangelical Christians wouldn't set foot in a movie house.
Unfortunately, though, Clark’s solid train of thought jumps completely off track when he makes this statement:
American evangelical Christians do not like metaphor. That's not strong enough. They fear metaphor. It terrifies them, and so they despise it, reject it and forbid it wherever possible.
This is why evangelical scripture reading conspicuously avoids the Gospels.
Um, that’s news to me.
Clark goes on to make the puzzling claim that evangelicals both favor the letters of St. Paul and “prefer their truth in simple, unambiguous propositions.” I thought I’ve heard just about every claim imaginable when it comes to the Bible. But that’s the first time I’ve ever heard anyone refer to the epistles of Paul as “simple and unambiguous.” To be fair, maybe Clark knows something we don’t. If so, he should share his insight with the rest of us. Perhaps we can clear up some of these differences between Catholic and Protestant theology.
The misunderstanding about our fear of metaphors was a peculiar claim in itself. But to have him lay the blame at the feet of one of my intellectual heroes is downright stunning:
(The late Francis Schaeffer -- whose influence on the last few decades of evangelical culture would be difficult to overstate -- provided the pseudo-intellectual justification for this hatred of metaphor. He was famous for wearing knickers, for declaring that "all truth is propositional and all politics genital" and for condemning Soren Kierkegaard as the Antichrist. The fact that Schaeffer decried metaphor while simultaneously calling for greater Christian engagement in the arts is an example of what the Antichrist would've called irony-- another forbidden literary device.)
That whole knickers thing? Yeah, that was kind of weird. But when did Schaeffer ever condemn Kierkegaard as the Antichrist? And where does he get the idea that he espoused a “hatred for metaphor?” His perception of Schaeffer’s thought is nothing short of bizarre.
While I’ll concede Clark’s point that the Left Behind books are fairly “metaphor free” and that most “worship music” is mind-numbingly literal, that doesn’t lead to the conclusion that that evangelicals have an aversion to metaphoric art. True, most of our art sucks. But that’s just because we have extremely bad taste.
These claims would be rather odd for anyone to make. But coming from another evangelical, I find them especially confusing.
Sure, some of us hold on to the label, but the truth is we no longer fit in, and we're no longer really accepted.
I still consider myself an "evangelical" Christian -- I'm still born-again, after all. But once one recognizes that even this phrase -- "born again" -- is, like all language about the transcendent, a metaphor, one no longer is completely comfortable or completely welcome within the evangelical subculture. There metaphor is still distrusted and feared. They are like Nicodemus on the rooftop, still clinging to their pharisaical propositions, unable to grasp why this compelling teacher insists on speaking in riddles.
I'll be perfectly honest and admit it. I have no clue what he's saying there.
I don’t mean to pick on Clark* but he has exposed one of the most common problems evangelicals face: a complete misunderstanding of where we stand.
If someone who lumps himself in with the rest of us who wear the evangelical label can have such a profoundly misguided view of our beliefs, how must those outside the faith view us?
It’s no secret that evangelicals have an image problem. Perhaps, though, its time we stop whining and finally do something about it. What we need is a PR rep that can make our “brand” more “marketable.” Someone who can make us “hip” or “edgy.” Maybe we can even get the rep who does the marketing for the Left Behind books. Talk about a genius, that guy can work miracles.
*Note: For a more balanced view of the issue, see the post by Kevin at Lean Left in which he goes into greater detail examining the merits of both Sullivan and Clark’s arguments.
1
I never read fiction anymore, but have read all this series except the latest, last installment. I started them out of a sense of pastoral duty, since so many others were reading them, and as a dispensationalist I wanted to know what they were teaching.
That said..I do not get your complaint that they are unreadable. But like I said, I do not have much basis of comparison. Maybe given the nature of the theology books I have been studying over the last several years, in school and out, it is just that I relished a "light read".
Obviously, they ain't Bunyan. But is any secular fiction at that level either?
I did read Robinson Crusoe a couple years ago. THAT is a good fiction read..but alas, another 300+ year old one..
posted on 06.18.2004 5:38 PM2
Steve,
That said..I do not get your complaint that they are unreadable.
Well, I could be overstating the case; I just wasn't able to make it through the first book without cringing. I will say, though, that it was more readable than Joyce's Ulysses (I just had to kick at that dog one more time).
I did read Robinson Crusoe a couple years ago. THAT is a good fiction read..but alas, another 300+ year old one..
I'm embarrassed to admit it but I just got around to reading that book this year. I was literally shocked to find that it had such a Christian worldview at it center. It is much more interesting than I was lead to believe.
posted on 06.18.2004 5:51 PM3
Left Behind isn't unreadable. Its just stale. It is the product of trend and reflex, empty of thought and promoted and read because it is "Christian." In our search for cultural relevance, we blindly mimic the secular world and then hack pieces off and replace them with "Christian" elements. Either that, or we promote half-baked ideas and works in order to compete with the secular world. Is it a product of Fundamentalism? Maybe we went into our shells for so long and then we finnaly figured out we were shooting ourselves in the foot. The last of the great Christian works came with Tolkein and Lewis, a span of fifty years or so.
The only way we're going to become relevant is to quit worrying about being damn relevant and to quite trying to emulate secular culture. Instead, we need to quit whining and simply deal with the world. Unless we shed our insularity and wade into the muck, so to speak, we'll never achieve anything close to revival or see fabulous ripe mission fields.
posted on 06.18.2004 6:13 PM4
Agree 100%. Completely unreadable. I know it's for a Christian audience, but no profanity? Not even from the Antichrist?
Poor character development. Terrible dialogue. Tries to cover the Battle of Armageddon in about five pages. Huh? Tom Clancy spends three pages explaining how a single bomb goes off--I get less than twice that for the greatest battle of the ages?
For all that, though--Robertson's books are worse. I'll never forget the world's air forces being knocked down over Israel in a miracle of God, and Israeli ground forces using the fuel from the destroyed aircraft in their tanks and vehicles. Doesn't any proofread over there? Didn't it occur to Pat or anyone who works for him to say, "Hmmm, I know airplanes use kerosene, of the highest grade. So assuming that the gas tanks don't explode on impact with the ground, can the kerosene go into a tank, most of which burn #2 diesel? Maybe we should check that out before we order up 250,000 copies."
Horrible. And in his book, the Antichrist actually says "Horsefeathers". Twice. Again, can't we just assume that the Prince of Darkess might actually say something he picked up from the depths of hell, if not by just watching the Sopranos?
posted on 06.18.2004 6:17 PM5
Joe, I read Robinson Crusoe because I read a great WSJ editorial comparing the shallowness of that Tom Hanks castaway movie versus Crusoe. The author made the comparison of how Hanks' character is so indicative of today's secular man. It really was quite good, and prompted me to give Crusoe a read.
posted on 06.18.2004 7:25 PM6
I think the reason for much of the confusion in your post has to do with the lack of a common definition for the term "evangelical". I suspect you might find a fundamentalist subculture more receptive to the left behind books. Fred Clark also seems a bit confused. Also, he doesn't sound like an "evangelical" but more like a liberal with quite a bit of hostility toward evangelicals - but, again, I guess it gets back to how you define "evangelical". The broader your definition, the less you can generalize about the group and expect the generalizations to make any sense.
I'm an evangelical and I haven't read any of the Left Behind Series. Generally, I don't read "Christian" fiction. It just doesn't seem realistic to me. Part of the problem is that any book labeled as "Christian Fiction" needs to cater to the lowest common denominator for that genre or risk being labelled as being "un-Christian". I'd rather read fiction that just happens to correspond to an evangelical worldview.
-jdm
7
Amy is just a wet-behind-the-ears intellectual wannabe who is taking a typical shot at her upbrings to effect some separation. Somebody like that saying Evangelicals 'fear' metaphor is the exact same thing as one of them saying George W. Bush has no 'intellectual curiosity'. Just as juvenile a statement. These people are just breathtakingly juvenile and obviously suffering from everything they accuse others of suffering from. It's just unfortunuate that so many of these types get hand-held through intitutions of higher learning (such as they are) and get their delinquent cluelessness rewarded with little pieces of paper.
posted on 06.18.2004 9:19 PM8
I am a historian and teacher, with three books published to date (very dry, dull works about old, dead things. I'm sure you've never run into any of them!), and like several others, had a hard time getting through the Left Behind books. It didn't help that LaHaye was a (mostly absent) member of my church and The Wife, She Who Must be Obeyed, had devoured the whole series, usually by nightfall of the day each volume was released.
Writing books is the closest thing I know to semi-legal torture, and having had the experience, several times, of attempting to create Brilliantly Crafted Gems of Prose (TM) while staring blankly at that d--n cursor blinking on the blank screen and feeling the clock tick-tick-ticking away at what little is left of my deadline cushion, well, it makes me give LaHaye and Jenkins a bit more of a break when it comes to the production of those books.
That said, yes, they are not the greatest of literature, and there are some potential issues with the scriptural interpretation they are based around, but the real value of these books, IMHO, is their very popularity - which really does mystify me as to the source. As a Christian, you must agree that SOMETHING is going to happen SOMEDAY, and the more one is reminded of this fact, and the more it is caused to be brought up in everyday conversations, the more one is caused to consider whatthe impact of all these evenst will be to us, our friends, family and most importantly, the unsaved all around us.
Whatever makes this fact stay on our minds also makes us respond to it, one way or another.
posted on 06.18.2004 9:50 PM9
Kevin--Agree with most of your points, but the M-1 Abrams will run on diesel, gasoline, kerosene, or even JP-1 jet fuel (not sure about JP-5). Note, this only makes the Roberton's scenario slightly less implausable.
posted on 06.19.2004 6:26 AM10
I managed to get through one of the Left Behind series; I was not all that impressed (full disclosure: I'm not a dispensationalist, either). The plot was thin, the characters were characatures. I too find it amazing that these books have sold 60+ million copies. It is not that there is a dearth of good books out there taht Christians can feel good about reading. Any fiction (or non-fiction) by C.S. Lewis, or Tolkien will do. If you are looking for light summer fiction, I thought Oliver North's books were pretty good (granted some of it was a little thin, especially the Clinton admin characters), but I was shocked at how readable they were, and that my wife liked them, as well. Joel Rosenbueg's were also pretty good if you like kind of Clancy-esqe thrillers. All these books had some powerful Christian themes without overwhelming the story.
posted on 06.19.2004 6:54 AM11
Good points, all.
I'm not attracted to what accounts for Christian fiction nowadays either. I'd rather go for history books and classics over anything fictional at the Christian book store.
Last time I checked, Jesus said that "The children of this generation are in a way more knowlegeable [or smarter, or clever, I don't remember] than the children of light." Maybe that's the reason why most of that fiction may be so insipid.
Maybe something was taken out of our muse the moment we became Christians, or maybe it is that we have allowed ourselves to be more "conformed to our new environment" rather than transformed in God (check Romans 12). Remember that even in Christian circles, the pressure to conform is just as strong as anywhere else.
I might be wrong, but at least this is my two cents' worth. Meanwhile, I'd rather stick to reading C.S. Lewis.
posted on 06.19.2004 4:19 PM12
I breezed through all the Left Behind series except the last one (will probably read it too), because I want to keep up with what a lot of people in my church have read. Borrowed them all. Needless to say, I didn't read them for theological content (not dispensationalist either) or for literary value (prefer the classics). The only reason I can figure so many people like them is that they are easy to read, fast-paced and treat a subject of fascination--endtimes. You gotta figure a whole lot of people who don't go to church regularly arre reading them, with that number of sales.
Anybody read any of the Catholic authors--Graham Greene, Flannery O'Connor, Annie Dillard, Shusaku Endu (Silence), Michael O'Brien (Father Elijah)? Also, for higher Evangelical literary tone, check out Frederick Buechner (Brendan and others) and Walter Wangerin (Paul: A Novel and others).
posted on 06.19.2004 4:35 PM13
BR,
Graham Greene, Flannery O'Connor, Annie Dillard, Shusaku Endu (Silence), Michael O'Brien (Father Elijah)? Also, for higher Evangelical literary tone, check out Frederick Buechner (Brendan and others) and Walter Wangerin (Paul: A Novel and others).
Excellent suggestions! I would particularly recommend “Father Elijah.” It’s a lot like the “Left Behind” books except that it’s well-written, non-dispensational, and from the point of view of Catholics. (And you won’t be embarrassed to admit you read it.)
posted on 06.19.2004 5:46 PM14
Ohhh, I _like_ the Left Behind Series. Its like comic books that mention Jesus. They're strictly a beach read, but so what? Obviously a lot of people agree that they're a fun read; they sell jillions of books...
posted on 06.19.2004 6:46 PM15
That being said, I just finished a novel that is Christian in some senses-sort of a weird future history thing where an imitation of the American Revolution happens under an imitation of the Roman Empire-and when it was done I was wondering... well, it has sex, violence, and a bit of cursing in it. I'll bet if it gets popular someone will register DavidscottisNOTachristianauthor.com someday...
posted on 06.19.2004 6:51 PM16
Joe,
I'm a bit perplexed, too. I've enjoyed most of the Left Behind series, but there's no way I could claim them as intellectual literature. But compared to most mainstream modern literature thay're not bad. (Not good, either.) It's nicer to see explicitly Christian themes in a well-written book, but even when that happens (like, um, "The Green Mile") most outspoken Christians ignore the book, so what does it matter.
Look, Christians are always going to prefer the Bible itself to anything from the hand of Man, so this is a moot point. There are fine examples of modern literature with Christian themes, but they get knocked in many Christian circles for something or other, else they get knocked in mainstream circles for not being "realistic" enough.
John Grisham is a Christian and brings much of his worldview into his novels, but he's not recommended in church reading groups. Or he's disparaged for writing mass-market paperbacks.
Anyway, my point is that if you don't like the theology of Tim LaHaye, you're not going to like the Left Behind books. If you're open to dispensationalism and you're a marginal Christian, you're going to be drawn in by the books--especially since they're about people WHO WEREN'T STRONG CHRISTIANS WITH THE RAPTURE OCCURS. They not written for you, Joe. You might as well criticize the Sunday night "outreach" service at your chuch. It's not for you, and if you want something deeper, go to the Sunday morning service.
We already have the greatest piece of literature ever written, so stop complaining.
True evangelicals attempt to attract others to the Bible, not the other way around.
posted on 06.20.2004 12:35 AM17
My, I've stumbled into a meeting of the Elitist's Literary Club! At the risk of being immediately branded a theological and literary simpleton, I respectfully suggest that many of you may have missed the point of the Left Behind (LB) books. I agree with BR; their popularity stems from the fact that they are "easy to read, fast-paced and treat a subject of fascination--endtimes"....but I would add that many believe it's delivered from a fairly faithful (no pun intended) Biblical view which closely, if not exactly, matches their own.
Yes, there are many times the quality of the writing has been a diversion, but the main concept, that is, what will it be like to witness the Rapture and live through the Tribulation period and personally witness Christ's Second Coming, is a compelling idea. It also, in a contemporary fashion, reminds us that God expects our lives to be a witness for Him, and that we can and should have a direct, if small, influence on who's left behind (pun intended) after the Rapture.
Let me say that I have long been a fan of C.S. Lewis and have recently discovered Tolkien, (I am embarrassed to admit it took me so long) but I also have read each of the LB books, with great enjoyment.
Do I wish someone of Lewis or Tolkien's talent had been behind the effort? You bet. But I was able to be drawn into the story, regardless and in spite of the weak writing. Am I embarrassed to admit that I've read them? No.
Joe, I will certainly take a look at "Father Elijah". Thanks for the suggestion and thanks for a great Blog. It's one of the few that I always read daily.
Happy Father's Day all.
posted on 06.20.2004 1:11 AM18
The idea of Christian literature is the real problem. Same with Christian music. Is Beethoven's 3rd 'Christian music'? (Yes, it is. But you don't have to call it that.)
Christianity is not a religion, it is Reality.
Read Calvin (is that a bad word on this blog?) on this subject of literature. He will tell you (as your common sense should have already told you) that there is God's grace in varying degree in works of literature and art and music and etc. A Christian can very obviously get ALOT from reading ANYTHING. The focus should not be 'Is it Christian?' but 'Can I increase my level of understanding by engaging this influence?'...
Reading the ancient Greeks is a very 'Christian' thing to do. The greatest teachers of the Church were completely educated in classical literature (Augustine, Calvin himself being very prominent examples). A Christian can read a de Sade even with profit. Knowing the depths helps you to recognize the heights. A Christian shouldn't shy away from ANYthing.
Getting an understanding of the Bible is the primary goal of a Christian, but getting understanding from all influences available is actually necessary to carry that out to begin with.
posted on 06.20.2004 3:59 AM19
"So how can we explain the fact that the series has sold 60 million copies?"
Brittney Spears Syndrome.
20
I think you're being too hard on the bad taste of evangelicals. We seem to be right in line with the rest of America. Have you checked out the best sellers in any category of entertainment ("art" is too generous) over the last few years?
Yes, as a nation, we'll read/watch/listen to "good" art when it's easily available and not too challenging. But we'll also take in whatever else is available and selling well. We must be fed!
Most Americans head right for the wide, comfortable center. How else do you explain the fact that Leno regularly beats Letterman by almost two to one? That smart, engaging TV, movies, and books often quickly vanish? Evangelicals do not have the market cornered on a rote, unchallenging cultural appetite.
America loves entertainment, and a large percentage of us care deeply about issues of Christian faith. Thus, create populist entertainment (quickly consumed, easily digested, serialized) that focuses on biblical themes ("The Passion," "Left Behind") and gets noticed in the press—and we're there in big numbers.
It's not just an evangelical thing. It's downright patriotic.
posted on 06.22.2004 11:09 AM21
I have read all but the last LB books and found them hard to put down and badly written at the same time. My understanding is that it was not intended as a series, but all "those boorish evangelicals" demanded more. So the plot development, characters, and all got off to a bad start.
My most frequent thought while the books were that they could have been so much better, more riveting, believable, and scary! The anti-christ and his worldwide organization came off like hogan's hero's nazi's. Evil, but too incompentent to be realistic.
Currently I am working my way through C.S. Lewis' Space Trilogy again, first time in at least twenty years.
posted on 06.22.2004 12:32 PM22
I have no clue who this Clark is, but I'm not so sure he is an evangelical as historically defined. As metaphor, I remember Kirsty Macauley reading Lord of the Rings with Mrs. Schaeffer when she visited down from college in the Cities.
"politics genital"? I can't remember anything like that in Schaeffer. Not even the concept of sexual politics.
Joe, I didn't make it through the first couple of -pages- without cringing. I couldn't finish the dreck. (LB)
John M. Your -post- has vastly better use of the English language than LB!
One of the chief reasons that Christian fiction - i.e. that sold in Christian-themed chintz shops, is that is what -sells-. I asked Marvin Olasky about one of my modern favorites that they dropped about a decade ago, and he said that he loved them too, but they didn't -sell-. (No Clock in the Forest and sequels)
Lars Walker has written some decent spiritual thrillers for the secular Baen label. Connie Willis has also done something similar, though I suspect she is less evangelical than the Free Lutheran Lars Walker.
posted on 06.22.2004 2:22 PM23
Um, both Buechner and Wangerin are liberals, not evangelicals, but they do write fairly well.
posted on 06.22.2004 2:26 PM24
Note to Steve: Be advised that "Father Elijah" is very Roman Catholic.
I've thought a lot about why Christianity seems to often come off shabbily in media (especially TV), and have decided that only the greatest art and artists can do justice to the ultimate transcendent theme. I agree with above posting that our standard is the Bible--how can mortals compare?
posted on 06.23.2004 10:49 AM25
Anyone heard anything that the Left Behind series was a vastly-expanded rewritten knockoff of what was probably the "Eye of Argon" of End Time Christian Fiction, Salem Kirban's 666?
(Note -- "Eye of Argon" is considered the worst sword-and-sorcery story ever written, sort of a verbal Plan Nine from Outer Space; group readings of it (you read until you either bust up or puke, then hand it off to the next sucker/reader) are standard at a lot of SF conventions.)
posted on 06.25.2004 7:11 PM