L.B.: Two swell guys

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.

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 the asexual 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 those two paragraphs 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.

Comments

[Jesurgislac]

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.

*bwah!* *falls over laughing*

All of the above? Meta-Hattie and Meta-Chloe would be so much more interesting...

[Robb]

It's all about the Hamiltons baby.

I wonder: would Ray have considered Mr. Pibb & Red Vines to be prophetically delicious?

[Praline]

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.

Are the second two sentences in any way relevant to the first? You would assume so, given their placing. But as he's talking about what 'everyone' knows and his professional skills, I can only assume that the 'light' conversation consists of non-stop boasting about his resume, including footnotes as to guys he's worked with who can back him up with reference. I've been on some uncomfortable dates, but that beats all.

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.

Ah, homosocial bonding. Chloe's bracingly masculine handshake, seen earlier, presumably comes from her dad... But it's a fairly classical story, this one: two splendid chaps cementing their all-important relationship with a slightly-less-important sexual contract between A and the female relation of B. Usually it's a sister, but that's too close to a couple being equals in age, which might imply equality in other areas, and that would just be disgusting. I'm tempted to cry 'gay subtext', but I don't think it is; I think it's complete self-absorbtion: women are viewed instrumentally, and the primary function of Chloe is to weld our two heroes together.

[Ken]

This portrayal of Rayford's utter lack of self-awareness does not seem to be deliberate.

I HAVE known people who ARE that clueless. It's like some sort of cartoon Asperger's.

1) 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.

2) ...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.

Well, they ARE self-inserts. I think that fact explains a lot. Has anybody in this massmind run into LH&J and can confirm that they are as Rayford & Buck are portrayed, unintentionally self-inserting their own flaws?

3) The simpler explanation seems more likely: Very Bad Writing.

That, too. Makes me wonder what a REAL pulp writer (like Norvell Page) would have made of the same situation. Page could crank out 80,000 words in 3-4 weeks just like Jenkins, but you got one helluva ride in those 80,000!

(During the heyday of pulps in the 1930s, Norvell Page, under the house name "Grant Stockbridge", was the writer of The Spider, the most over-the-top pulp crimefighter in history. Move over Shadow, The Spider -- aka "The Master of Men" -- routinely racked up the biggest body counts and most extreme mass destruction per page in his monthly battles with the pulp villain of the month in such "novels" as The Red Death Rain ("She is dead. We were too late. The ourang-outan had mated."), The City that Dared Not Eat (villain-of-the-month poisons ALL NYC's food supply, forcing New Yorkers to resort to cannibalism), The City Destroyer (villain releases a gas that weakens steel and brings most of NYC down like the WTC), and Machine Guns over the White House (self-explanatory). Could you imagine what Page would have done with LaHaye's notes and outline? Next issue: "THE ULTIMATE SPIDER NOVEL -- THE END OF THE WORLD! THE SPIDER vs THE ANTICHRIST!")

[burgundy]

"At some point the women returned"? Nice to know Rayford is so interested in Hattie and Chloe's spiritual well-being that he notices when they're around.

Jesu, we're counting on you to have the Meta-Hattie and Meta-Chloe conversation up on Right Behind.

[aunursa]

The simpler explanation seems more likely: Very Bad Writing.

This is the actual reason for 90-95% of the flaws in this series.

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.

I always assumed that neither woman had any interest in hearing Rayford expound on his End Times Prophecy Gospel in all its glory AGAIN. They had both suffered enough the first time.

[Praline]

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.

How is Rayford technically minded? He spends all his time thinking about how to control the women around him. Have we once seen him thinking about engines? Science is obviously out, what with Darwin and all, but I don't think Rayford ever wastes a thought on anything other than manipulating and bearing down other people's opinions. He's all opinion and interpersonal observation. His opinions are stupid and his interpersonal insights are stupider, but still.

Though I fear detonating the computer by putting the following two words anywhere near Ray Steele, he is entirely of the liberal arts persuasion rather than the technical school of thought.

[Praline]

Oops, was that my fault with the italics?

[Praline]

How do we fix this?

[aunursa]

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.

Alas, you get a lot of that in the sequels.

[Praline]

Aha.

[Robb]

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.

As the crowd dispersed, Jesus asked his disciples what the roads were like, and Peter immediately rushed off to get a chariot. James & John, meanwhile, concerned themselves with the itinerary of where Jesus would be teaching next. The rest of the disciples directed the masses of humanity that flowed away from the scene. By the side of the road, there was a woman crying that her child had been carried away ahead of her in the crowds.
Soon, Peter came back with a chariot, having paid double the chariotman's usual rate, and Jesus & his most trusted 5 disciples were off to perform more miracles, which the people regarded with wonder.

[Boze]

yay! i've been waiting for this all day

rejoice!

[Vermic]

This portrayal of Rayford's utter lack of self-awareness does not seem to be deliberate.

This is something I've been thinking about for a while. Some books feature unreliable narrators. LB goes one step further and offers both unreliable protagonists AND unreliable authors. The main characters lie to themselves about their real motivations, then the writers lie to themselves about their characters lying to themselves. It falls to us, the readers, to scrutinize the brute facts of the tale -- the actions actually taken and the dialogue actually spoken -- and figure out for ourselves the psychological backdrop of it all. I would call the whole thing wonderfully meta, if I thought that LaHaye & Jenkins were doing it at all intentionally.

FWIW, my tipping strategy is to go 1/6 of the bill (16.67%) and round up to the nearest quarter.

[Vermic]

Oh, italics tags. From hell's heart I stab at thee!

[Boze]

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

Brilliant

[aunursa]

The women's departure was not "by design," leaving Rayford "privately frustrated, almost to the point of anger."

Those darn women. Don't they realize that they're supposed to follow the script?

[Fraser]

Praline the italics seem to just happen. Time after time.
And an earlier conversation between Buck and his editor established that Rayford, as a pilot, is one of those "scientific types" (which had my geek friends rolling in the aisles when I mentioned it).
Didn't care for the Spider myself, Page was nowhere near as smooth at pulp stuff as Walter Gibson or (better yet) Lester Dent. But I agree that any of them, Page included, could do better with this material than L&J

[aunursa]

How do you end the italics?

[Kayte]

working alongside one of the Guild's Master Craftsman.

You were evidently right: There are no classes for Christian copy editors.

Feh.

[aunursa]

Wow that was easy. All I did was put the <(/i)> at the beginning of my comment without the parentheses.

[scyllacat]

I'm just going to start putting backslash-i in pointy-brackets at the front of all my posts. Now, what was I thinking? Oh, right. Chloe and Hattie leaving the table is, I think, Supposed to be the pull of the Devil Woman, the Siren call of Satan trying to take Chloe away from this edifying discussion. We're supposed to be worried for her soul. Instead, we're us, and we're wishing we were in the green room with Hattie, Chloe, a cigarette, and a vodka gimlet. Maybe three vodka gimlets.

[Boze]

"From hell's heart I stab thee!" Excellent!

I mentioned last week the experience of reading "All Hallow's Eve," by Charles Williams. There was a brilliant article published in a book entitled "The Christian Imagination" several years ago which explores the shame-faced paltriness of evangelical imagination and thinking when compared with bygone luminaries such as C. S. Lewis and Chesterton.

It quoted a passage from the beginning of the second chapter of "All Hallow's Eve," which is about a person overcoming his grief at the death of his wife in much the same way Rayford theoretically has to overcome Irene's disappearance in "Left Behind."

From "Left Behind":

"What a sweet, sweet woman!" thought Rayford. "I never deserved her, never loved her enough..." And Rayford cried himself to sleep.

From "All Hallow's Eve":

"The most lasting quality of loss is its unexpectedness. No doubt he would know his own loss in the expected places and times - in streets and stations, in restaurants and theatres, in their own home. He expected that. What he also expected, and yet knew he could not by its nature expect, was his seizure by his own loss in places uniquely his - in his office while he read Norwegian minutes, in the Tube while he read the morning paper, at a bar while he drank with a friend. These habits had existed before he had known Lester, but they could not escape her. She had, remotely but certainly, and without her own knowledge, overruled all. Her entrance into all was absolute, and lacking her the entrance of the pain."

I say nothing of beauty or eloquence. There is more discernment and understanding of human nature, more awareness of reality, and more wisdom in the first line of this paragraph than in all the volumes of "Left Behind."

[Cowboy Diva]

I for one am fascinated by Hattie and Chloe walking out. After all, I can't remember the last time I watched someone leave during the altar call.

[Robb]

"From hell's heart I stab thee!"

Funny [not really] story: I can't remember when I read Moby Dick all the way through the first time, but it was long after I saw Star Trek II, where Ricardo Montalban quotes that line. I always thought it was "From Hell's hot, I stab at thee!", which makes just as much - possibly even more, depending on how much of a Jonathan Edwards fan one is.

[Mau de Katt]

.

[Selcaby]

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.

I suspect that here we have the secret of LB's success. All those Christians who believe it's wrong to read anything other than "Christian" fiction, but who are secretly fed up with sermons, flock to LB because it skips them.

[Mau de Katt]

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.

Waitaminnit.... Why is Chloe asking permission from Buck to leave the table? Ah, obviously the "Ownership Baton" has already passed from her father to Buck. No wonder Rayford is "frustrated almost to the point of anger"! LOL....

(For that matter, why is Chloe even asking permission at all??? Of course, Hattie doesn't ask permission. Evil Whore-of-Babylon-to-be! Self-determining Woman! How DARE you make your own decisions!!!!)

Gah, and Meh.

[Brian J.]

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

That's because that's what American Chirstianity is- Obedience to Authority, never mind what that DFH from 2000 years ago said.

[ChristianPinko]

Ken - I'll second your recommendation of The Spider. Great stuff with absolutely no redeeming value whatsoever.

Somewhat related to this, is anyone familiar with golden-age comics artist Fletcher Hanks? If only he could have done a comic-book version of LB! It would still be evil, but it would also be the most awesome creation in the history of everything.

Here's a sample of Hanks's work. You'll see what I mean:

http://www.misterkitty.org/extras/stupidcovers/stupidcomics5.html

[Ember Keelty]

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.

...

Ha! That is too awesome!

Maybe Jenkins tried to write the scene with the two of them there, and they fought back? Like, maybe he couldn't think of anything they could possibly say that would be conducive to Buck's conversion, and everything he could think of that they would say would be destructive, so he effectively put a muzzle on them throughout the whole thing. Then at the end he realized that their being in the scene and saying NOTHING the whole was TOO weird, and so he went back and hastily wrote them out.

The upshot? Our girls managed to escape from the narrative for a good forty minutes. Way to go, girls!

[LM]

Surely I'm not the only one thinking Chloe and Hattie should have left for some lesbian sex. At least it would have made this book more interesting.

[Gabriel]

Is it wrong to wish to write something where my Gary Stu beats the shit out of Rayford? Is there at least the satisfaction of this jerk being waterboarded or something later in the series?

I think I'm beginning to hate him more than any fictional character I can think of.

I LOVE LB FRIDAY!

[Peter Boysen]

I wholly agree on tipping. I've worked in food service, and I'll certainly point out that no coworker ever heralded the virtue of either a Christian's good stewardship by withholding their money, nor did I ever hear anyone praise the brilliance of laying up someone elses treasure in heaven.

[cjmr]

No, LM, you aren't. That was my second thought. My first thought was that they went off to the bar to play "Let's discuss how crazy Rayford is acting".

My take on why Chloe asked Buck, not her father, if he minded if she left is that he was the one conducting the interview. He might have wanted to ask her questions, or ask her what she thought of her father's answers.

[Chris Archer]

Hattie and Chloe actually left the room before Rayford's Big Sell. They stopped at the bar, and Chloe said to Hattie' Lately he's been getting a little weird. Before Mom left him. Without a note. Mom didn't take a toothbrush. Yeah, I'll think I'll have a vodka martini.

[Ursula L]

As to Chloe asking before leaving the table:

She may still be young enough to be asking out of habit, particularly if Irene was one to insist on old-fashioned table manners.

It may just have been a normal "please excuse me, I'll be back in a moment" that one says when leaving the table at a formal dinner, but the compulsively authoritarian L&J misinterpreted it as asking permission.

It may have been a hint for Hattie to join her, so they could talk sanely for a few minutes or so that Hattie wouldn't be left at the table alone to deal with the two idiots, rather than leaving without saying anything. (Particularly if they spent the afternoon together at a spa or salon, I'd guess they are at least on friendly enough terms to chat.)

****

Ah, homosocial bonding. Chloe's bracingly masculine handshake, seen earlier, presumably comes from her dad... But it's a fairly classical story, this one: two splendid chaps cementing their all-important relationship with a slightly-less-important sexual contract between A and the female relation of B. Usually it's a sister, but that's too close to a couple being equals in age, which might imply equality in other areas, and that would just be disgusting. I'm tempted to cry 'gay subtext', but I don't think it is; I think it's complete self-absorbtion: women are viewed instrumentally, and the primary function of Chloe is to weld our two heroes together.

The whole Buck/Rayford dynamic in regards to Chloe reminds me of the rather disturbing picture of the year by UNICEF. Not too much, but enough to have an excuse to share the whole horrid story.

Picture here: http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/0,5538,27426,00.html

Article here: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,524630,00.html

[janet]

"Sir, we do have an extensive reservation list --"

Yet another utterance that makes no sense at all a week after the Event.

[Salamanda]

Brian J: That's because that's what American Chirstianity is- Obedience to Authority, never mind what that DFH from 2000 years ago said.

DFH. Damn Fine Hero? Dude From Heaven? Delightfully Frisky Horticulturist?

The mind boggles. :)

Mau de Katt: Waitaminnit.... Why is Chloe asking permission from Buck to leave the table?

See, that was the first thing that struck me too! Geez, they had a cookie and some creepy flirtation. Now he owns her soul? I'm with LM, though. Bring on the slash!

[Salamanda]

cjmr: My take on why Chloe asked Buck, not her father, if he minded if she left is that he was the one conducting the interview. He might have wanted to ask her questions, or ask her what she thought of her father's answers.

You know, that does make a bit of sense. I hadn't thought of that, since I'd framed the whole scene in terms of Rayford Is Monologuing.

Re: tipping
My husband says things like "God Bless", and I've admitted to him that it still makes me cringe a bit. But I also figure since he tips around 30%---usually rounding up to more---I can learn to deal. But then again, he was a busboy before he was a Christian, so there ya go. :)

[Dean Booth]

Yay, LB Friday!

Tipping: Dividing by five seems like work! I just double the total and move the decimal point.

[Jesurgislac]

janet: Yet another utterance that makes no sense at all a week after the Event.

I read it at once as waiter-code for "I can't wait to get you and everyone with you out of here". It would be said even if they were surrounded by empty tables, which, probably, they are. Rayford hasn't noticed.

[Ursula L]

Yet another utterance that makes no sense at all a week after the Event.

The whole setting of a formal restaurant makes no sense.

First, this is Buck's interview. He, not Rayford, should be choosing the location, making the arrangements, and paying for the meal.

Second, he should want privacy. They're talking about the greatest tragedy in human history, so things are going to get emotional, and he doesn't want his subject inhibited by prying eyes. So his location of choice should be a restaurant that caters to business deals and has small conference rooms, or else he has a suite at a top hotel, and has dinner catered by room service in the suite's living room.

[car]

Dean - I move the decimal point and then double! Heretic!

[Ember Keelty]

@LM I won't deny that that was one of the many wonderful possibilities that crossed my mind.

[Karen]

This scene reminds of a couple dates I had in college, with guys who weren't all that familiar with places where the customers ordered from menus at while sitting at tables instead of reading from billboards while standing at counters. I recall spending lots of time in the restroom, too, but I never managed half an hour, no matter how hard I tried.

The Spider is an interesting comparison. I've been wondering since I've started reading LB Fridays, I've been comparing the writing in these godawful books with other Bad Writing I actually enjoy. I'd love to see how Edgar Rice Burroughs would have handled this storyline. Also Robert Heinlein, who wrote dozens of Mary Sues and Gary Stus who also gave out with chapter-long monologues, but who still managed to rite interesting stories in such a way that allowed the reader to skip the dull parts. (Stranger in a Strange Land and The Mooon is a Harsh Mistress are still two of my favorite books. Few monologues.) I have completely failed in my quest to come up with a writer as bad as LaJenkins. That's quite an achievement.

[Toby]

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.

Sublime. Fred should write for the Wittenburg Door.

[DragonessEclectic]

Hey! ERB is not bad writing. His stories are still being printed and read, almost a century later. He wrote enduring adventure/romances that people still like to read. That is the mark of a *good* writer and storyteller.

Can you imagine people still wanting to read L&J in 2097?

[Pepper]

Surely I'm not the only one thinking Chloe and Hattie should have left for some lesbian sex. At least it would have made this book more interesting.

I am so glad I wasn't the only one who thought that. The Internet is corrupting me...

[Karen]

Dragoness, I can't imagine anyone reading L & J in 2007, much less in another 100ien years. I was trying to come up with pulp writers and ERB is the patron saint of pulp. I didn't do a very good job of it, of course, so let me try again. There are dozens of writers out there who aren't considered "great" who could at least have made this a competent thriller. Heck, my just-turned-six year old son makes up better stories about monsters fighting his Playmobil pirates and Romans.

You know, I just thought of something. John Carter of Mars claims to have been transported by some unknown mechanism from the battlefields of the Civil War to Barsoom. Maybe those WERE ERB's Rapture stories!