L.B.: Losing Chloe

Left Behind, pp. 400-409

Buck Williams isn't intended to be perceived here as the ever-present, unshakeable, stalker-pursuer of Chloe Steele. That role is reserved for God. We're supposed to see Chloe here as chased by the very "Hound of Heaven." God has tracked her down, worn her down and now, at last, we come to Chloe's big conversion scene.

Then again, "conversion" may be too grand a word for what happens to the converts in Left Behind. None of them seems to be converted to anything. They do not become followers of Jesus, receiving and bestowing grace in pursuit of restoring right relationships with God and neighbor. Instead, they merely become believers in a series of propositions about "the Antichrist and all." Unlike Rayford and (shortly) Buck, Chloe undergoes a change in personality following her recitation of the magic words, but the change is entirely one of subtraction, not of addition. She ceases to be "independent" (the word is used more than once as a pejorative) in her thinking, becoming mindlessly receptive and obedient. Her coming to faith is not portrayed as the conclusion of an intellectual quest for meaning by a carefully thoughtful young woman, but rather as the abandonment and rejection of that intellect, that quest, that care and thoughtfulness.

Chloe's "conversion" is thus one of the saddest events in a book full of woes and calamities. We met her more than 300 pages ago as the spunky Stanford undergrad who somehow managed to transverse half the country, on her own, during the chaos of the aftermath of The Event. She alone voices the reasonable objection that the "God" of LB seems arbitrary, vindictive and cruelly pleased to be inflicting suffering. When that objection never gets a response, she has enough spunk to walk out of Bruce Barnes' evasive and shallow "skeptics meeting." And she alone sticks up for the badly mistreated Hattie Durham. All of that makes her one of the few even slightly realistic characters in the first half of the book, one of the only characters we can, or want to, relate to.

Yet after just a few days under her father's roof, Chloe begins to change. The brave, curious, skeptical character accidentally sketched earlier is replaced with a cowering, whining child, spending days at a time sitting alone in her room, doing nothing, constantly on the verge of unconsolable tears. The change is so stark that it seems to parallel the warning signs of abuse or assault that I was taught to be on the lookout for when I worked with teenagers. The abuse, in Chloe's case, is occurring at the hands of the authors.

Her conversion scene is intermixed with more of what passes as romantic-comedy banter between Chloe and Buck. She is charmed, moved and won over by his creepy seat-next-to-hers surprise, which she takes not just as a gesture of his affection, but of God's. The first thing she says to him is, "Have you ever received a direct answer to prayer?"

Buck shot her a double take. "I thought your dad was the praying member of your family."

"He is," she said. "But I just tried out my first one in years, and God answered it."

"You prayed I would sit next to you?"

"Oh, no, I never would have dreamed of anything that impossible. How did you do it, Buck?"

Yes, the same girl who nine days ago got from San Jose to Chicago while all commercial flights were grounded is now in awe of Buck's seat-booking skills. But let's get back to the wet fleece on the dry ground and the kind of faith that expects and requires a "direct answer to prayer":

She took his hand again. "Buck, this is too special. This is the nicest thing anyone's done for me in a long time."

"You said you were going to miss me, but I didn't do it only for you. I've got business in Chicago."

She giggled and let go again. "I wasn't talking about you, Buck, though this is sweet. I was talking about God doing the nice thing for me."

They both repeat their admiration for how sincere, serious and compelling her father's spiel had been the night before:

"If I didn't know better, Buck, I would have thought he was trying to convince you personally rather than just answering your questions."

"I'm not so sure he wasn't."

"Did it offend you?"

"Not at all, Chloe. To tell you the truth, he was getting to me."

Chloe fell silent and shook her head. When she finally spoke she was nearly whispering, and Buck had to lean toward her to hear. He loved the sound of her voice. "Buck," she said, "he was getting to me, too, and I don't mean my dad."

OK, I don't have the power to enforce this, but I'm declaring a moratorium on any further use of dramatic whispering until Jenkins demonstrates a better understanding of when it is and isn't effective. All this whispering makes me feel like I'm watching an M. Night Shyamalan film.

"Too bizarre," he said. "I was up half the night thinking about this."

"It won't be long for either of us, will it?" she said. Buck didn't respond, but he knew what she meant.

I appreciate that the last lines there were intended to be hopeful. She means that their salvation is close at hand. But those lines don't seem to convey that. They seem more full of unspoken dread and foreboding, like something Dana Wynter would have said to Kevin McCarthy while hopelessly trying to stay awake in that cave outside of town.

"When do I get to be the answer to prayer?" he prodded.

"Oh, right. I was sitting there at dinner with my dad pouring his guts out to you, and I suddenly realized why he wanted me to be there ... He wanted me to get it indirectly. And I did. I didn't hear how he started because Hattie and I were in the ladies' room, but I had probably heard that before. When I got back, I was transfixed. ..."

So it was the ladies' room. For half an hour. The ladies' departure from the table was presented as a significant and meaningful event. We weren't told where they were going or what they were up to in their absence. It seemed intended as a mystery. Now here, nearly 20 pages later, we're off-handedly informed that they were just in the ladies' room, which doesn't account for either the length of their absence or for the dramatic buildup surrounding their departure.

This sort of thing happens enough in LB that you sometimes get the sensation you're reading one of those group-written take-a-turn stories in which each writer contributes succeeding paragraphs. Also, what is it with LaHaye & Jenkins and rest rooms? (Feel free to supply your own Larry Craig joke here, but let the easy ones pass.)

"It wasn't that I was hearing anything new. It was new to me when I heard it from Bruce Barnes and saw that videotape, but my dad showed such urgency and confidence. Buck, there's no other explanation for those two guys in Jerusalem, is there, except that they have to be the two witnesses talked about in the Bible?"

Buck nodded.

That's nodded in agreement, I think, not nodded off to sleep because he's exhausted and Coke is a woefully inadequate caffeine-distribution device and here we go again with the Steeles and their sleep-inducing obsession with the Jerusalem street preachers, although the latter would have made more sense.

It's easy to miss the subtle dismissal above of Irene Steele. Chloe hears her manly man father's urgent and confident presentation of prophecy mania and she's shaken to the core. But she doesn't even remember that every word he said was something she had heard previously, over and over again for years, from her mother. "It was new to me when I heard it from Bruce Barnes," she said. No, it wasn't. I'm not sure whether the authors, too, have forgotten all about Irene's years of obsessive witnessing to her husband and daughter, or whether they're just suggesting that a woman can't be an evangelist. Either way, Irene turns out to have been so inept and ineffectual at spreading her prophecy gospel that it's a wonder she even qualified to be Raptured.

Next we get another 20-pages-later explanation, confirming what I'd pretty much expected about why Chloe was -- unnoticed and without explanation at the time -- crying at dinner the night before:

"So, Dad and God were getting to me, but I wasn't ready yet. I was crying because I love him so much and because it's true. It's all true, Buck, do you know that?"

"I think I do, Chloe."

"But still I couldn't talk to my dad about it. I didn't know what was in my way. I've always been so blasted independent. I knew he was frustrated with me, maybe disappointed, and all I could do was cry. I had to think, to try to pray, to sort it out ..."

Curse all that blasted independence and thinking and sorting things out! We -- thankfully -- are spared an explicit portrayal of Chloe's prayer of conversion, but if the pages leading up to it are any indication, these are the very things she confesses as sins and repents of.

"I've been convinced," she said, "but I'm still fighting. I'm supposed to be an intellectual. I have critical friends to answer to. Who's going to believe this? Who's going to think I haven't lost my mind?"

Intellectual pride can be a sin, of course, but it is not the only sin. Nor is intellectual pride and having an intellect the same thing. Yet Chloe, like Rayford before her, treats the very possession and use of her intellect as the foremost of her sins. This form of confession strikes me as itself a violation of the first commandment: "Love the Lord your God with all your mind."

"I got on this plane, desperate for some closure, pardon the psychobabble, and I started wondering if God answers your prayers before you're ... um, you know, before you're actually a ..."

"Born-again Christian," Buck offered.

"Exactly. I don't know why that's so hard for me to say. ... I prayed and I think God answered. ...

"Chloe, what exactly did you pray for?"

"Oh, well, the prayer itself wasn't that big of a deal, until it was answered. I just told God I needed a little more. I felt bad that all the stuff I'd heard and all that I knew from my dad wasn't enough. I just prayed really sincerely and said I would appreciate it if God could show me personally that he cared, that he knew what I was going through, and that he wanted me to know he was there."

And then she turned and found Buck sitting next to her. "It was as if God knew better than I did that there was no one I would rather see today than you," she tells him, and gives God full credit for a direct and specific answer to prayer.

So this is what it takes to impress her. The Event and the Israel Miracle didn't stir her in the least. The Trip and Die Guys she found impressive, but not sufficient. But this -- this tangential-at-best maybe-response to the vaguest of vague requests -- this she treats as proof beyond any reasonable doubt. This conversion of Chloe's would make very little sense in any other setting. In this setting, in this story, it makes no sense at all.

She announces her intention to recite the magic words and invites Buck to join her, prompting this bit of dialogue that reads like it was lifted from a Very Special Episode of Blossom:

Buck hesitated. "Don't take this personally, Chloe, but I'm not ready."

"What more do you need? ... Oh, I'm sorry, Buck. ... If you're not ready, you're not ready."

It's here that Chloe has the flight attendant summon her father to hear her "extremely good news." We cut back to Rayford's point of view because this is how Jenkins works: If Chloe sends her father a message, the next scene has to be of her father receiving that same message. This is part of his secret formula for cramming a 200-page novel into a mere 468 pages. He really could have skipped the three-paragraph detour into Rayford's perspective here, and we'll skip most of it too, except for the first sentence --

Rayford was manually flying the plane as a diversion when his senior flight attendant gave him the message.

-- just so we can do our best Butthead impression. "Heh heh. Heh. Heh. He said manual diversion." (Juvenile, yes, but the opening sentences of the book -- "With his fully loaded 747 on autopilot ..." -- introduced the jumbo jet as surrogate penis motif, so don't blame me.)

We quickly return to Buck's POV, which is the next best thing to fading to black for sparing us from the intimacies of Chloe's spiritual ecstasy.

[Buck] peeked back at Steele with his daughter, engaged in intense conversation and then praying together. Buck wondered if there was any airline regulation against that.

Buck Williams may not yet be ready to declare himself a born-again RTC, but he's already acquired their persecution complex. There must be an airline regulation against praying -- probably even a federal law -- because, you know, Christians in America are so often made to suffer for their faith. Those first-century Christians had it so easy by comparison. That's why John's Apocalypse wasn't written for or about them, you know, but for and about us 20th- 21st-century American Christians. And only us 21st-century American Christians.

Comments

[Robb]

Huzzah for doubleshot of LB Friday!

[Josh D]

Wow! I'm first!
Today's entry felt so, what's the word..., sharp?
Fred really sounds like he's tearing the binding apart on his copy of LB. I think reading all this crap has really taken a toll on the poor fellow.

[Josh D]

Dang it! Not first!

[Lax Tool]

Alas, Chloe, we hardly knew ye...

Buck wondered if there was any airline regulation against that.

Because everyone knows the FAA is staffed by heathens.

[mmack]

All this whispering makes me feel like I'm watching an M. Night Shyamalan film.

"I read about brain dead people in Left Behind. Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're brain dead and stuck in a bad novel."

[Ursula L]

[Buck] peeked back at Steele with his daughter, engaged in intense conversation and then praying together. Buck wondered if there was any airline regulation against that.

I suspect any airline regulation would be regarding the pilot spending half the flight in the passenger cabin chatting with his daughter, rather than, say, being in the cockpit and flying the plane.

Apparently along with wishing he'd been raptured (thus killing all his passengers) he's now also willing to kill his passengers by leaving the plane to fly itself, without his attention. (And no, autopilot is not a substitute for having the flight crew pay proper attention to their jobs.)

[aunursa]

She alone voices the reasonable objection that the "God" of LB seems arbitrary, vindictive and cruelly pleased to be inflicting suffering.

This observation applies to the entire series, not just the first 400 pages.

he's exhausted and Coke is a woefully inadequate caffeine-distribution device

It worked for me when I had to stay up all night on Shavuot.

The Event and the Israel Miracle didn't stir her in the least. The Trip and Die Guys she found impressive, but not sufficient. But this -- this tangential-at-best maybe-response to the vaguest of vague requests -- this she treats as proof beyond any reasonable doubt.

Reminds me of the 300 so-called prophecies of Jesus that Evangelicals like to use when proselytizing to Jews.

[aunursa]

Ursela L.: he's now also willing to kill his passengers by leaving the plane to fly itself, without his attention.

Or he trusts the copilot.

[Bugmaster]

Why is Rayford flying his plane on manual, anyway ? Isn't that completely unnecessary and possibly dangerous ? Just checking.

[Keith]

So just for a lark, he was flying the plane? I realize jumbo jets are pretty much automated these days but still, Captain Rayford Steele had his hand on the tiller and everything? Man, guess that's why he's one of those watchacallit-- Captains. They don't let just any old junior co-pilot handle one of these babies!

And that was the lamest conversion scene, ever. Who are these people who find this story so compelling and do they have to wear helmets when they get in a car?

[Carolyn]

First time LB poster, but I just had to say it:

Buck wondered if there was any airline regulation against that.

Why yes, apparently:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/11/21/america/NA_GEN_US_Passengers_Removed.php

[Dude]

So it was the ladies' room. For half an hour.

Must've tried the taco platter.

[Ursula L]

You have both a pilot and a copilot so that you have two people around to keep an eye on things, and to step in if the various automatic functions fail.

If he'd stepped out briefly, for a short conversation, that would be reasonable. At this point, it seems as if he's been out there for half an hour, or more.

And only a week or so after a massive horrific event involving dozens of plane crashes, all over the world. It's no wonder that the other passengers are looking at him strangely - he's the pilot. And many planes have recently crashed because some or all of the flight crew disappeared mid-flight. And not any sort of pilot - Christian pilots.

Seeing the pilot of your flight praying to Jesus, in this circumstance, would be very alarming. And an FAA regulation requiring blood sacrifice to Cthulu, pre-flight, just to ensure no more disappearing Christian pilots, might well be reasonable at this point in time.

[mmack]

Rayford was manually flying the plane as a diversion when his senior flight attendant gave him the message.

Chiming in as a private pilot for a second, but that particular sentence gives me chills. Granted, I was not taught to fly anything bigger than a Cessna 172 (Think everyday four-door sedan with wings), but the first thing I was taught is ALWAYS FLY THE PLANE! Give as much attention as you can to flying the aircraft because the last thing you want to be is "behind the curve", which roughly means "Holy Crap! I'm in the middle of an emergency, what the HELL do I do NOW?" If flying a 747 is a "pleasant diversion" for Rayford Steele, steely eyed jet pilot, I'll be praying if he's my pilot.

Ursula,

On an aircraft as large as a commercial jet, as long as the co-pilot is in the cockpit, throwing the aircraft on autopilot is acceptable. In IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) weather conditions, it is often standard operating procedure to put the airplane on autopilot to hold a steady course while the pilot and\or copilot perform(s) navigational operations. In most cases the autopilot does a better job of holding an aircraft straight and level than us humans with our terrible trait of wanting to "overcontrol" the aircraft.

And every pilot has prayed the Pilot's Prayer: "Oh God, please don't let me (screw) up!" :^)

[Pilot mode off]

[mmack]

Why is Rayford flying his plane on manual, anyway ? Isn't that completely unnecessary and possibly dangerous ? Just checking.

Bug, it's WAY more fun!

"Hey Bob, ever do a STALL in one of these babies? Pull those throttles back to idle and watch THIS!"

[Ursula L]

On an aircraft as large as a commercial jet, as long as the co-pilot is in the cockpit, throwing the aircraft on autopilot is acceptable. In IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) weather conditions, it is often standard operating procedure to put the airplane on autopilot to hold a steady course while the pilot and\or copilot perform(s) navigational operations. In most cases the autopilot does

My point is that, even when autopilot is on and the appropriate thing to have doing the job of most of the flying, you want both pilot and copilot spending most of their time and energy paying attention to whatever is going on. Apropriate short breaks, taking turns for naps, in an organized manner, on very long flights - fine. Spending long chunks of time sitting out in the passenger cabin chatting with your daughter, with no clue as to what is going on in the cockpit, and not necessarily able to get to the cockpit quickly in an emergency - not so good.

[Jesurgislac]

This is part of his secret formula for cramming a 200-page novel into a mere 468 pages.

Bwah!

[aunursa]

Ursela L: And many planes have recently crashed because some or all of the flight crew disappeared mid-flight. And not any sort of pilot - Christian pilots.

Strange, none of the characters noticed this.

[Dan]

The brave, curious, skeptical character accidentally sketched earlier is replaced with a cowering, whining child, spending days at a time sitting alone in her room, doing nothing, constantly on the verge of unconsolable tears.

Which is exactly how all good Christian women should behave. Didn't she get the Submissive Woman manual?

"It won't be long for either of us, will it?" she said. Buck didn't respond, but he knew what she meant.

Double entendre alert! Double entendre alert!

But this -- this tangential-at-best maybe-response to the vaguest of vague requests -- this she treats as proof beyond any reasonable doubt.

In L&J's defense, I knew plenty of girls (and boys) in Bible College who behaved exactly this way. "He's the man of my dreams! Oh, God, give me a sign!" (cue shooting star or train whistle) "Oh thank you, God!" (spends rest of lonely life wondering why Mr. Wonderful didn't get the same sign).

[Ursula L]

mmack also said: "...while the pilot and\or copilot perform(s) navigational operations..."

"Performs navigational operations" - that is, doing their job as a pilot or copilot, is quite different from spending half the flight chatting in the passenger cabin.

[mmack]

Appropriate short breaks, taking turns for naps, in an organized manner, on very long flights - fine. Spending long chunks of time sitting out in the passenger cabin chatting with your daughter, with no clue as to what is going on in the cockpit, and not necessarily able to get to the cockpit quickly in an emergency - not so good.

Whattaya, work for the FAA or sumpthin'? :^) Next your gonna' tell me I can't put this baby on autopilot and sleep my way across the Atlantic!

Ursula, I agree with you, but it's Left Behind Land! :^p

[Becky]

She alone voices the reasonable objection that the "God" of LB seems arbitrary, vindictive and cruelly pleased to be inflicting suffering.

This observation applies to the entire series, not just the first 400 pages.

Not true! Chaim (the Israeli scientist) raises it as an objection at one point too. Like Chloe, however, he eventually converts without ever having that objection resolved. And also like Chloe, he loses his slightly interesting personality when he does so.

[mmack]

And Ursula, remember, Rayford flies for Rapture Airways, where there slogan is "Your luggage is the only thing that will be Left Behind!"

[Robb]

He's the man of my dreams! Oh, God, give me a sign!" (cue shooting star or train whistle) "Oh thank you, God!" (spends rest of lonely life wondering why Mr. Wonderful didn't get the same sign).

Haha - I also saw many folk make such mistakes at the bible college I went to. Even at my most zealously orthodox stages, I always thought this was funny (though whether I found it also pitiable depended on my mood).

[aunursa]

Becky: Chaim (the Israeli scientist) raises it as an objection at one point too.

You're correct that Rosensweig raised the idea of God as arbitrary ... but I seem to recall that scene simply as portraying a typical Jew being unable to understand God's actions and divine plan -- not specifically as an objection to the idea of a benevolent God or His divine plan.

However my memory isn't perfect, and I've made mistakes before.

[Cowboy Diva]

Aunursa: "Reminds me of the 300 so-called prophecies of Jesus that Evangelicals like to use when proselytizing to Jews."

In a recent bible study, as we were discussing first the fundie technique of prooftexting and then the use of Isaiah in the gospels, a newbie in the group said, "So Matthew was prooftexting Isaiah?"
Oh the joy on our pastor's face as she fell out laughing.

[Karen]

I particularly liked Fred's analysis of Irene's role in this post and the not-very-subtle misogyny on display in it. I occasionally check out RTC women's websites because I have some kind of severe brain defect, which is only made worse by the advice on said websites. Anyway, one of their constant tropes is that men need respect but women need love, implying that it's possible for someone to love a person he doesn't respect. This is an excellent demonstration of that principal in action. In fact, it's probably the only example of Jenkins following the rule of "show don't tell." Irene, being a good woman, was perfectly content with everyone she cared about thinking she was a dimwit, and now her daughter is about to do the same.

[cjmr's husband]

Buck wondered if there was any airline regulation against that

Of course there must be! It's a subsection of the "one non-christian pilot must be on board" regulation.

FAA regulation requiring blood sacrifice to Cthulu, pre-flight

That too.

But Fred's right, it's the prayer-in-school persecution complex. Because airline cockpits are government property, I guess.

[Praline]

It was new to me when I heard it from Bruce Barnes and saw that videotape, but my dad showed such urgency and confidence.

And again with the greater admiration for Ray Steele than for Christ. And again. And again. The actual message of Christianity is just an 'it', a placeholder for another hagiographic description of Ray's 'confidence' - like the guy needs his confidence any further puffed.

What is wrong with these people?

Also, 'critical friends'? That's the standard answer of anyone who doesn't agree and doesn't want to wonder why. It's the same reason people assume anyone seems brighter than them, or has more abstruse tastes, or uses longer words, or doesn't seem to enjoy things that please them. They can't possibly mean it. They're all just a bunch of stuck-up fakes trying to impress each other.

My cat just sneezed on the keyboard, and she's making more sense than this book.

[aunursa]

Actually I notice that Rosensweig does offer an objection in the fifth book Apollyn: "I have to say I don't understand your God. He seems mean-spirited to me. Why can he not get people's attention through wonderful miracles, as he did in the Bible? Why make things worse and worse until a person has no choice? I find myself resisting being force into this by the very one who wants my devotion. I want to come willingly, on my own accord, if at all."
Apollyn, p. 303

I stand corrected.

[Becky]

anursa, yup, that's the passage I was thinking of. I spent the rest of the books angry that the authors didn't even attempt to give us an answer to that objection (and that Rosensweig converted without getting one!)

[Hibryd]

"Oh, well, the prayer itself wasn't that big of a deal, until it was answered. I just told God I needed a little more. I felt bad that all the stuff I'd heard and all that I knew from my dad wasn't enough."

Your. Mom. And. Brother. Freaking. Vanished. Into. Thin. Air.

That's a pretty big clue right there, either of God or something with god-like power. But the Stanford student doesn't consider that sufficient evidence so she asks the God-Genie to grant her yet another prayer-wish. Yes, Chloe, the God-Genie just kidnapped billions of children and killed millions more in the aftermath, but you're just *so special* that he'll take time out of his very busy schedule to make you feel better by sending a creepy 30-year old stalker in your direction.

Now that I think about it, their idea of God might be the worst character in the entire book.

[Vermic]

Buck: "You said you were going to miss me, but I didn't do it only for you. I've got business in Chicago."

Sometimes, when commenting on Left Behind Fridays, my objections to a section of the book are just so big that I can't articulate them, so I end up picking on some little side problem instead. This is one of those weeks.

So here goes: Why does Buck put forth all this effort to, er, "charm" Chloe with the thoroughness of his stalking, and succeed, only to immediately undercut himself by going all "Well, this wasn't just for YOU, you know." What's that about? You don't delight someone with a diamond ring and then, in the midst of their heartfelt thanks, explain that you got it with a gift certificate that you were looking to use up anyway. At least, not unless you have some deep-seated self-loathing issues that impel you to sabotage every romantic gesture you initiate. Which would actually explain a thing or two about Buck, come to think of it.

Because everyone knows the FAA is staffed by heathens.

Well, post-Rapture, I suppose it would pretty much have to be.

[Esther]

Two fantastic, insightful, and laugh-out-loud-funny installments on one day! Huzzah!

I got on this plane, desperate for some closure, pardon the psychobabble

Nobody's jumped on this phrase here, yet, but I see it as another manifestation of that anti-intellectual mindset. It might've stood out to me in particular because I've known too many evangelical Christian friends who're unwilling to seek out therapy for mental illness, because any kind of psychiatry or secular interest in mental health is dismissed as "psychobabble." The fact that Chloe considers the phrase "desperate for some closure" -- an assessment of her mental state, not a glaring example of trendy pop-psychology! -- as an instant warning sign of "psychobabble" means that she's already channeling that distinctly Evangelical attitude.

Or, at least, that LH&J have been so indoctrinated by it that, once again, they can't tell the difference between their own assumptions and anyone else's.

[Abelardus]

Dan: "Double entendre alert! Double entendre alert!"

And because I can't resist: Ha, ha! Multiple entendre!

Kudos, Fred, on your Invasion of the Body Snatchers reference; it's a fitting parallel to the loss of soul Chloe's gone through.

[car]

Buck: "You said you were going to miss me, but I didn't do it only for you. I've got business in Chicago."

And the solution would have been so simple. To avoid looking like a weirdo stalker AND to avoid backhanding her like that, all he had to do was to switch the sentence around. "Oh, I had business in Chicago, so I had to go anyway, but then I thought, why not try to spend the trip with the most beautiful and engaging woman I've ever met?"
Or something like that, anyway.

[mcc]

"I've been convinced," she said, "but I'm still fighting. I'm supposed to be an intellectual. I have critical friends to answer to. Who's going to believe this? Who's going to think I haven't lost my mind?"

This bit fascinates me because the clear message seems to be that "intellectualism" is a social thing, a product of peer pressure. Because there's no reason to do all that thinkin' and book-learnin' when you do not have the oppressive social force of someplace like Stanford specifically coercing you toward it, as soon as Chloe is no longer in that social environment she just stops. But even outside of that environment and freed of the requirement to perform critical thinking, she is afraid to make decisions that would go against the set of constrictive social rituals that is intellectualism-- for she fears the "critical friends" she shall have to face the judgement of when she goes back.

[Spherical Time]

Vermic: Well, post-Rapture, I suppose it would pretty much have to be.

There's all those Catholics and other "Not True" Christians.

[Lucia]

Anyway, one of their constant tropes is that men need respect but women need love, implying that it's possible for someone to love a person he doesn't respect.

That's because "love," at least in this context, doesn't mean to them what it does to you. The love that women (and children) are alleged to need is very close to custodial care, and the "respect" that men are supposed to be accorded in return is very close to fear.

(On a very weird whim I acquired a book called How To Keep Your Man Monogamous. The answer turns out to be four words, or rather three with one repeated. The first two are "suck up." The book says that the female reader need feel no embarrassment about doing this, because putting the man's needs before her own is the only way to fulfill her own greatest need, namely, to be loved. And there are hoary tales of a woman's focusing on, say, meeting a work deadline, and next thing she knows the dude is looking elsewhere for the suckage, er, fealty due him. And this book is not even "Christian.")

[Dylan]

Yes, Chloe, the God-Genie just kidnapped billions of children and killed millions more in the aftermath, but you're just *so special* that he'll take time out of his very busy schedule to make you feel better by sending a creepy 30-year old stalker in your direction.

Yeah, I'm a little weirded out that Buck's creepy and/or romantic seat-booking trick is presented as a sign from God and an answered prayer. That raises all manner of questions about the nature of free will versus necessity, and prayer's place in that balance. At least it does in my mind; L&J may not be considering the theological implications of the scenario they've proposed.

She ceases to be "independent" (the word is used more than once as a pejorative) in her thinking, becoming mindlessly receptive and obedient.

I just read The Screwtape Letters (thanks to a mention of it on here a few weeks ago) and it's interesting how this is the exact opposite of Lewis's concepts of individualism, independence, and reason. In Lewis's book it's the devils that want to take away individualism, cause dependence, and make people too stupid to realize what's going on around them.

[Grumpy]

"I wasn't talking about you, Buck, though this is sweet. I was talking about God doing the nice thing for me."

Near as I can tell, the "nice thing" is coextensive with Buck's scheme to sit next to her. In other words, she's giving God credit for Buck's actions.

I realize this is a common way for many of my neighbors to think about the world -- that is, anything that happens, God Did It. This is perverse for at least two reasons: #1, it's disrespectful to the feelings of fellow human beings. If Buck is only on the plane because God put him there, Chloe doesn't have to deal with Buck's internal motivations. Unless, of course, God implanted those internal motivations. Which brings me to perversity #2: If God can manipulate human actions in this way, God is undeniably responsible for human evil. It nullifies the Free Will defense to the Problem of Suffering.

[Brett]

"Yet after just a few days under her father's roof, Chloe begins to change. The brave, curious, skeptical character accidentally sketched earlier is replaced with a cowering, whining child, spending days at a time sitting alone in her room, doing nothing, constantly on the verge of unconsolable tears. The change is so stark that it seems to parallel the warning signs of abuse or assault that I was taught to be on the lookout for when I worked with teenagers."

I guess that explains why she's in school at Stanford.

[Chris]

*lights a candle for good!Chloe*

I'd love for this book to explore the double motivation in Buck going willingly/being sent by God.

But alas. And we even have to wait hundreds of pages for the army of locusts or scorpions or whatever the hell they are..

[Vermic]

Near as I can tell, the "nice thing" is coextensive with Buck's scheme to sit next to her. In other words, she's giving God credit for Buck's actions.

I wonder if this also works the other way? Just as Chloe's faith was forged by the timely appearance of Buck, maybe Hattie's was crushed when he left her sitting in that taxi. There she is in the back seat, waiting, the meter running. With nothing to do, she uses this quiet time to assess her own beliefs. She even says a little prayer in her head.

"God," she prays, "if you're out there ... so many strange and terrible things have happened this past week, I guess I just don't know where my faith lies anymore. I guess I need a little more, God. Some sign that you're watching out for me down here -- that I'm not neglected, not forgotten. That's all I need."

And Buck never comes back.

[Praline]

You said you were going to miss me, but I didn't do it only for you. I've got business in Chicago.

Because, however much Buck may Love Chloe, she's got to Respect him. Which means she mustn't expect him ever to put her at the top of his priority list. His career comes first. Everything in his life comes first. Nothing's ever done 'just for her'. That would be too close to letting her have her way. Next thing you know, she'd be thinking she was entitled to ask for stuff, and expecting her wishes to be respected, and well, you can just imagine how THAT relationship would end. Divorce, adultery and gay sex in crack houses, that's how.

[Mau de Katt]

I just read The Screwtape Letters (thanks to a mention of it on here a few weeks ago) and it's interesting how this is the exact opposite of Lewis's concepts of individualism, independence, and reason. In Lewis's book it's the devils that want to take away individualism, cause dependence, and make people too stupid to realize what's going on around them.

Yeah, but he's one-a them thar... IntellECKshuals. You can't beLIEVE a word-a what HE says.

*sniff*

[Nina]

Brett, are you a Cal fan by any chance?

[Chan]

So, Rayford goes and talks to his daughter instead of flying the damn plane.

So when the plane scrapes a long, black scar across some Indiana corn field and three people survive the wreck, one of them can start proselytizing for Jesus because God obviously extended His hand and protected that person.

If God chose not to protect those other people on the plane, it must have been because He wants this particular prophet to have a good emotional appeal to lay out to his audiences, and not because God is a petty, vindictive dick or only slightly all-powerful.

And what also irritates me about a certain subset of Christians is that they harangue and fuss at me for making the universe "human-centered" because I'm a "secular humanist," and yet if anything out of the ordinary happens, it must be God working for their particular good even at a cost from other people.

That makes me grind my teeth, waste my youth and use up my teeth.

[Hysterical Woman]

So Buck literally God's gift to women?

[jamoche]

So just for a lark, he was flying the plane? I realize jumbo jets are pretty much automated these days but still, Captain Rayford Steele had his hand on the tiller and everything?

Why am I reminded of Zapp Branigan disabling the autopilot on the starship Titanic because he didn't think the programmed course was interesting enough?