At Patheos: TF: Amanda Hugginkiss

Fred Clark has posted a new Left Behind post, TF: Amanda Hugginkiss, at Patheos

This week Fred writes about pp. 407-413 of Tribulation Force.

Excerpt:

Even when such ordinary-seeming people turn out to have extraordinary powers or resources — like Buffy or Peter Parker or Harry Potter — the virtues that ultimately enable them to succeed, to become heroes, are virtues accessible to any ordinary reader. Magic or super powers aren’t in themselves enough — heroism requires pluck, quick thinking and, above all, courage.

The message of such stories isn’t that these heroes are just like you, but rather that you are capable of becoming just like them — that you, too, might rise to the occasion if you, too, were to summon up a level of courage heretofore undisplayed. The message of those stories is that you are capable of becoming a hero. That’s very different from the message of Left Behind, which is that you already are a hero — that you don’t need to change or to rise to the occasion or to respond to extraordinary circumstances by meeting the challenge with extraordinary courage.

“Don’t go changing,” LaHaye & Jenkins sing to their readers. “You’re a hero just the way you are.” You can stay comfortably at home in the Shire, relaxing with your pipe after second breakfast, and so long as you assent to the proper ideology, that’s enough to make you a hero.

[Fred Clark, TF: Amanda Hugginkiss, September 19 2011, posted at Patheos.com]


Commentators who would like to share their responses to the new post with all of Fred's fans (old and new) can cross-post to both boards.

 

Comments

[Firedrake]

I don't think the message is entirely the comfortable reassurance that Fred talks about; it's more that a normal life can be a heroic one if you do it right, and the way to know that you're doing it right is that you're winning souls. Most of Irene's friends have been slaughtered by Zod (thanks Mouse), and that's the vindication of her life: she led them into the slaughterhouse.

"We're close." Down to just four layers of cloth between you, then?

The idea of an airline pilot as "captain" was invented for the Pan Am Clippers to make them sound more like a liner service than like Daring Adventurous Aviation, and it's never had any real backing; it's just for show.

A couple of years Rayford's senior? That's not a very RTC relationship.

My goodness, people can read this and still claim America doesn't have a class system.

Loretta is serving the church. Amanda is praying. Praying doesn't get people fed, doesn't change their bandages, doesn't hold their hands when they wake up screaming in the middle of the night. It may be useful in other ways - not my opinion, fair enough - but even the most vehement prayer advocate can usually see that it doesn't substitute for actual work.

[Phoenix]

The phenomenal sales of the Left Behind series is evidence that such superficial reassurance has some appeal, but I think that indulging in such cheap grace ultimately leaves one feeling cheaper and diminished. It lacks the inspirational and aspirational call to rise to the occasion. The reassurance that one doesn’t need to become any different or any better than one already is carries with it the implication that one is incapable of becoming any different or any better than one already is.

I don't agree with this statement, at least not without serious qualifications. I have met plenty of people (yes, they're all women) who legitimately struggle with the deep divide between how the world defines womanhood and how their religion defines womanhood.

They're looking to be validated, yes. They're lacking in self-esteem, yes. But they aren't necessarily looking to settle, or to stop improving. They're looking for something with which to combat the rather relentless message from the world that a) they are wasting whatever talents and brains they might have in order to be good Christian women, and b) they probably don't have many of those in the first place if they're willing to devote their life to such a stupid pursuit. (Especially if they also happen to be staying at home with their children.)

They're looking for reassurance that their higher power finds them worthy just as they are, because the world tells them that person is pretty damn worthless. The need to be loved just as you are is something that any child knows intimately. It doesn't mean that you don't ever want to improve anything, just that you want to know your parents love you even if you never accomplish anything special. Why should this apply any less to one's feelings toward hir "heavenly parent"?

I'm not saying this criticism is never valid (many Christians do use grace as an excuse not to improve) but this blanket judgment of the readers of Left Behind rather than the characters and writers strikes me as more than a little self-righteous and mean-spirited. Hardly qualities I've come to associate with Fred Clark. It's a bit disappointing.

[Rodeobob]

I was going to comment over at the other place, but it looks all derailed and flame-y, so this goes over here, in no particular order...

There is a dark side to the literary traditions of Peter Parker and Buffy. While the message is "if a crisis arrives, you might be able to rise to the occasion", since the transformation to heroism is tied to a catalytic crisis, it's far too easy to walk away with the message of "wait for a crisis, so you can be heroic then" rather than "being heroic is a function of character, not crises or super-powers; be heroic starting now".

On the weirdness of people addressing Rayford as "Captain"... yup, it's odd, but I think I realize the reason for it. After almost two books of ordinary people calling Rayford by a job-related title for no good reason, it almost makes the use of that horrible-sounding "potentate" title seem marginally less jarring. (it does not, however, make Rayford look like any less of a toolbox)

RTC courtship is beyond weird. Only in this genre would one woman extolling the virtues of a dead woman be considered part of courting the widower. Here in the 'real world', talking up someone's dead wife as a way to get close to them is just creepy. Conversely, feeling attracted to a woman because she seems to be really impressed by your dead wife? Still creepy. And then there's this:

She was always cordial and friendly, but what impressed him most was her servant’s attitude

I'm sure that "servant's attitude" is a bit of phrasing from the RTC lexicon that means something more than what it implies, but "I'm really impressed by that woman's willingness to be commanded and humbled" is creepy. (at least coming from Rayford; coming from an open kinkster, probably less so)

"...second only to the vanishings themselves — she was the reason I finally did come to the Lord.”

So Irene Steele's witnessing was second only to the world-wide phenomenon that defied all known laws of nature and physics, unprecidented in all of history? Other than that, Mrs. Lincon, how did you like the play?

Even when the authors try to talk someone up, it ends badly.

[Spalanzani]

Official Bruce Barnes Death Countdown: 35 pages

Unofficially Official Double Wedding Countdown: 12 pages

Aa~~~aand, drumroll please:

Officially Unofficial Meet the Bride Countdown: -4 pages

That's one down!

Sorry for neglecting The Homeland as of late (or not-so-late). Every week I mean to double-post the countdowns over here, but it just keeps slipping my mind. Anyway, now that one countdown's finished and the other two are winding down, I figure it's time to plan for the future. I think I'll wait until Fred begins reviewing the third LB book before starting up any new ones, but I welcome suggestions. Preferably I want events that will take place within the next book, just to avoid counting down events that are depressingly far off. So far I've got the Wrath of the Lamb earthquake as the big event of the next book, and I'm also considering starting a reverse countdown showing the total number of pages Fred has gone over so far.

[Literata]

Phoenix, when I look at those statements, I only see that Fred is making one blanket statement about the readers - that their enthusiasm for the books probably indicates that this approach has some appeal. The rest of it reads to me like a personal criticism coming from experience with "cheap grace" (which can be a quasi-technical term within the Christian world, btw). I didn't get that Fred was criticizing people who use religion to find value and make meaning - only those who use religion to find value in not doing the right thing and who try to make meanings incompatible with the real world.

[hapax]

RodeoBob:

There is a dark side to the literary traditions of Peter Parker and Buffy. While the message is "if a crisis arrives, you might be able to rise to the occasion", since the transformation to heroism is tied to a catalytic crisis, it's far too easy to walk away with the message of "wait for a crisis, so you can be heroic then" rather than "being heroic is a function of character, not crises or super-powers; be heroic starting now".

And I always thought that a condemnation of this attitude was the take-away message of 'SALEMS LOT, which is why I put it on my mental list of "profoundly moral books."

Other people ... don't read it that way.

(And now I have the finale of Tom Smith's LAST HERO ON EARTH stuck in my head. Ah well, there are worse ear-worms.)

[Ruby]

TW: emotional abuse

Phoenix: I don't agree with this statement, at least not without serious qualifications. I have met plenty of people (yes, they're all women) who legitimately struggle with the deep divide between how the world defines womanhood and how their religion defines womanhood.

They're looking to be validated, yes. They're lacking in self-esteem, yes. But they aren't necessarily looking to settle, or to stop improving. They're looking for something with which to combat the rather relentless message from the world that a) they are wasting whatever talents and brains they might have in order to be good Christian women, and b) they probably don't have many of those in the first place if they're willing to devote their life to such a stupid pursuit. (Especially if they also happen to be staying at home with their children.)

Not that "the world" doesn't criticize all women, no matter their choices, but I wonder if at least some of this message of "the world" comes not from the world, but from what the church says the world says.

I have been listening to a fair amount of Christian talk radio of late, and am struck by how very combative the tone is much of the time.* The hosts tell their Christian listeners that the whole world is against them, that everyone hates them, that the unsaved are to be avoided unless you are actually witnessing to them. Mind you, nobody from "the world" is ever actually cited as saying they hate Christian women or think they are useless or stupid, but the hosts sure spend a lot of time saying that they think such things.

It almost has the tone of an emotional abuser: "Sure, you could leave me if you wanted. But you know, don't you, that no one will ever care about you the way I do. I manage to love you, despite all your many flaws. And your brother is dismissive of you and your mother doesn't understand you and your co-workers aren't friendly." It's all about drawing battle lines and creating a deep divide where the divide might not be there at all, or at least not nearly so deep.

*Please note: I am well aware that Christian talk radio often has a particular, hard-core right-wing bent. I am in no way saying that all Christians talk this way. I'm just wondering if such attitudes comprise just a part of the problem.

[Ruby]

Off-topic, though speaking of divisiveness...

What I overheard last week: "At my kids' school, I think about a quarter of the kids are Catholic. The rest are Christian."

[Phoenix]

I'm sure that "servant's attitude" is a bit of phrasing from the RTC lexicon that means something more than what it implies, but "I'm really impressed by that woman's willingness to be commanded and humbled" is creepy. (at least coming from Rayford; coming from an open kinkster, probably less so)

@RodeoBob - I agree that the phrase is a little creepy and could probably do with some rehauling, but a servant's heart in anyone (male or female) truly impresses me.

I didn't get that Fred was criticizing people who use religion to find value and make meaning - only those who use religion to find value in not doing the right thing and who try to make meanings incompatible with the real world.

@Literata - I may not have been clear. I didn't mean that I thought Fred was criticizing folks who find value in religion. What I got from his post (more specifically) was that he was criticizing women who might identify with Irene because in his opinion, the only reason they would do so is because they all have this vindictive need to prove that they're right and everyone else is wrong, and that such women are probably not seeking to improve themselves because they think they're completely perfect and Jesus loves them best of all.

I was trying to point out that another perfectly valid reason real-life women might identify with and feel validated by Irene and what happened to her is because in their purview, she is finally getting her "reward" for being a humble, kind, servant woman* - the kind of woman the world not only overlooks, but often scorns outright.

In that sense it's not so much about proving something vindictive like "Jesus likes me better and one day you'll see that but by then you'll be burning in hell lol" as much as it's about feeling like even if the world might not value you, at the end of the day you are still valuable, and the way you are choosing to live is not pointless or a waste. I know plenty of women who would find such a message in a book like this and it's not because they all secretly wish unbelievers would burn in hell so they could enjoy their victory.

I don't know if that's any clearer. The short version is that I felt like Fred was oversimplifying why women might identify with Irene and feel vindicated by her fate.

*To the extent that she is actually portrayed this way - I realize the bad writing makes her come across as a self-righteous pain in the neck more often than not, but I don't think that's what they were going for when they wrote her.

[Brin]

Ruby: What I overheard last week: "At my kids' school, I think about a quarter of the kids are Catholic. The rest are Christian."

If it's "at my kids' school", then yeah. "At my school", well, when I was younger I knew of two kinds of Christian: "Catholic" and "generic". There were other kinds, but words like "Episcopalian" and "Presbyterian" flew right over my head. By the time you're old enough to say things like "at my kids' school", you should ideally have developed a more complex view of Christianity than "Catholic" and "generic".

Also, every single kid is Christian? Vast majority Christian I find easy enough to believe, but not one exception?

[Literata]

Phoenix, thank you for clarifying. I still didn't get that from Fred's post. I didn't see the concentration on women that you are - in fact, I see Fred's point as applying even more to the men, because it's the men in this book who don't rise to the occasion even when they might be expected to by Standard RTCism.

[Ruby]

Phoenix: The short version is that I felt like Fred was oversimplifying why women might identify with Irene and feel vindicated by her fate.

I understand why you feel that way, Phoenix. But I really think that Fred's interpretation is supported by the later books of the series.

In Glorious Appearing, Rayford's first words, his very first words to the wife he hasn't seen in seven years are, "Irene, you are permitted one cosmic I-told-you-so."

[Phoenix]

I'm just wondering if such attitudes comprise just a part of the problem.

@Ruby - I think you raise a very interesting point. Certainly when one goes looking for offense and persecution, one tends to find it* and it's easier to justify looking for it if one is told one should be looking for it.

Speaking from my own perspective, though, I don't think that "the world hates us" rhetoric is completely unfounded either. I have personally encountered a number of people (and I'm ashamed to say, I was one for a mercifully short while) who spend a lot of time and energy brutally and viciously attacking the church and often, mocking those poor saps who are stuck in it.

Not so much this:

The hosts tell their Christian listeners that the whole world is against them, that everyone hates them, that the unsaved are to be avoided unless you are actually witnessing to them.

They tend not to say that they hate Christians, are against them and want them gone - at least not directly. What they do is wildly distort religious beliefs in a strawman manner designed to mock practitioners and make them feel bad. Example: "I wish *I* could find a submissive woman, I wouldn't mind having a house slave to have sex with whenever I want."

A caveat: Many of the people I've heard expressing this vile attitude are not merely non-religious but ex-Christians. So I'm guessing that for them, a lot of the need to mock and criticize stems from the anger and pain that goes with feeling so completely betrayed, even deceived, by their religion and the individuals within it. I know that was a huge part of why *I* was such a jerk about the whole thing for awhile. (Not that this in any way excuses the behavior.)

But I have also met a handful of non-religious people who mock all religious people in a similar way. Usually not to their faces, but when you get them alone and they think they agree with you, the scorn really is apparent.

In short, I think your point has some merit but there's a story on both sides. Maybe Christians do go looking for offense in people who merely disagree with them, but I don't think it's all smoke. I have definitely encountered some actual flames from non-believers directed toward believers before.

I agree, though, that encouraging this "us versus them" divide on radio talk shows is all kinds of Not Helpful.

*An interesting side effect of spending so much time on Slack: I find a lot more casual speech offensive or unseemly than I used to, and I have more than once overreacted significantly to a fairly innocent comment because of a ten-page Slack discussion deconstructing what wasn't so innocent about the comment.

Overall I think it's good that I'm noticing problematic speech more than I used to, but I need to be more careful about internalizing insulting portions of insulting speech when they're not actually being aimed at me. That way lies martyr complex.

[Phoenix]

I understand why you feel that way, Phoenix. But I really think that Fred's interpretation is supported by the later books of the series.

In Glorious Appearing, Rayford's first words, his very first words to the wife he hasn't seen in seven years are, "Irene, you are permitted one cosmic I-told-you-so."

@Ruby - Oh, I completely agree that his interpretation is bang on, and that's why I normally don't complain about his deconstructions. I've read the whole series and it's every bit as awful and galling and inhuman as he says it is. Irene is no exception.

Fred is right to draw attention to how utterly wrong these books are on every conceivable level. I am not complaining about that in the slightest.

But he has more than once prided himself on not allowing his interpretations of the books, their characters and their authors to reflect on the flock of people that buy the books and read them and enjoy them. I think that's entirely appropriate, because it's completely possible to be a decent person and even a good Christian and enjoy these books on a basic level. It doesn't necessarily mean that you are a vindictive brat who is waiting for the day when Robo-Jesus destroys and judges the whole world except you and your little band of friends so you can feel awesome. Fred almost never implies that it does, but I felt he did in this particular post, and I didn't like it.

[ZMiles]

Having read Salem's Lot a long time ago, I didn't see your intrepretation, Hapax, but now that I think about it more it's intriguing me. I can definitely see it in some of the characters, like the jerk bus driver who seemed to fancy himself a tough warrior against the degenerate youth, but who folded instantly when he ran into the vampires. But I can also think of counterexamples, like Cody the mortician and Callahan, who seemed like good people in their daily lives before there was a crisis and were relatively stoic and courageous when it came time to fight evil, but who also folded with little fanfare. What was it about the book that led you to this interpretation?

[Rowen]

"There is a dark side to the literary traditions of Peter Parker and Buffy. While the message is "if a crisis arrives, you might be able to rise to the occasion", since the transformation to heroism is tied to a catalytic crisis, it's far too easy to walk away with the message of "wait for a crisis, so you can be heroic then" rather than "being heroic is a function of character, not crises or super-powers; be heroic starting now"."

I never really got that with Buffy, since she spends ALL her time training, and has to give up many things that are hallmarks of a "normal" teenager. And she had Giles behind her going "CONSTANT VIGILANCE!!!" Plus, especially in earlier seasons, Xander and Willow did a good job of being non supernaturally heroic.

[Literata]

TW: Imitating offensive conservative rhetoric, child abuse

Phoenix, actually, the problem that Ruby is talking about in specifically Christian/conservative talk radio is not about the relatively few obnoxious ex-Christians you describe. What Ruby is talking about, I think, is the people who say that liberals hate God and that anti-bullying efforts are actually a cover for pedophiles to recruit schoolkids and the like. While the annoying people you describe are annoying, the people Ruby's talking about are in fact doing exactly what she describes: spinning tales of persecution out of thin air.

[chris the cynic]

So, before I hit the thread here with a only somewhat on topic story post that is about half as long as the entire rest of the thread, I figured I should ask, is there anyone who is here and not there who actually wants to read such a thing from me?

It doesn't feel right to come in and make it so the majority of the writing here is a single post from me. I'm never sure whether it's a good idea to make a giant monster post in the first place, but there have been times before when I've posted things here that, I think, took up more than what everyone else said combined, and that makes it seem like it's even less of a good idea to do it here.

In this case crossposting wouldn't take up half the thread, probably more like a third, but it still seems excessive, so unless someone specifically wants me to I'll spare everyone.

[MercuryBlue]

I see no reason to object, chris.

[Dav]

I figured I should ask, is there anyone who is here and not there who actually wants to read such a thing from me?

Yes, although if others object, I'd make the trip.

[Will Wildman]

I have no objection, chris, but for purposes of compiling your many excellent works and saving yourself from concern over this sort of thing, have you considered something like a blog? In Slacktiverse/Patheos/other threads, you could post links/excerpts/etc to the relevant story if posting the whole thing made you nervous, and if someone from here or Patheos happened to follow it to see one of your brilliant World Without God stories or something, they might be pleasantly surprised to discover the exploits of Edith Cullen as well.

[Lonespark]

It would be awesome if chris the cynic's stuff was on a blog. Is it on Right Behind? Are we even still doing that?

[cjmr]

What Lonespark said.

[J]

Right Behind sounds perfect, even if it's just a link to an offsite blog, if it's still being actively maintained.

[Sixwing]

Well, the last Right Behind update was ten days ago, so it looks pretty active to me. *s*

Here's the link in case anyone needs it. ^^

[Ruby]

Literata: What Ruby is talking about, I think, is the people who say that liberals hate God and that anti-bullying efforts are actually a cover for pedophiles to recruit schoolkids and the like. While the annoying people you describe are annoying, the people Ruby's talking about are in fact doing exactly what she describes: spinning tales of persecution out of thin air.

Exactly. I'll give another example I just heard today (details purposefully left out), to illustrate what I mean. Long story short, a woman prayed for another woman in a public place. It was actually a pretty sweet story of a stranger reaching out to support a stranger. But the prayed-for woman's conclusion to the entire story was that the praying woman was incredibly brave and that Christians are currently fighting a war they can win. Yes, she used the words "war" and "win."

Now, nowhere in her story was there the merest mention of anyone giving them so much as a sideways glance as the praying took place. One woman prayed for another, they went on their ways. But this message of a "war," this idea that Christians are beset on all sides by people who hate them and want to stop them from praying, this is a big part of the problem. A story that has nothing to do with conflict of any kind becomes about conflict, because people have internalized this Us vs. Them message.

[chris the cynic]

have you considered something like a blog?

That has occasionally occurred to me. I kind of think that blogs should be for people who have something to say, like interesting explorations of the implications in the negative space of fiction. Or why Left Behind/Twilight/[Any of the things currently being deconstructed by slacktivites] is wrong.

If I were to get one I would mostly be populating it with stuff taken from what I say in the comment section of other people's blogs, which just seems weird.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I prefer when things to read do appear in full in the comments. I probably wouldn't have read Jessica_R's Threads, for example, if it had just been a link. As such the only time I'd have to really make use of it for, "I don't want to post this in full," purposes is when something is really long (which has come up more than usual lately.)

So it seems like it would be of limited utility at best.

That said, I have thought of it enough to ponder a name. My first choice is a no go because crazy means different things to different people and in many cases the meaning is bad. Not stubbing your toe bad. Being invaded by technologically advanced aliens who blow up aqueducts as an opening act when you happen to live in pre-fall* Rome bad. As such Pile of Crazy is out.

Stealing Commas only makes sense if I assume that I'm never going to do anything beyond not-quite-fan fiction and if I were to actually start a blog I feel like there should be more to it than that, as I said above.

*You have no idea how much I want to use the word "prelapsarian" there, but that's a different kind of fall altogether.

--
-Anyway, somewhat crossposted, somewhat revised:
--

It's long seemed to me that the Rapture should create heroes. "Faced suddenly with extraordinary challenges, the ordinary person is compelled to change and to become extraordinary." The Rapture is an extraordinary challenge. It should also, obviously, be something existing heroes are compelled to confront by whatever it is that makes them heroes.

I've tried to think about what characters from some of my non-Rapture stories would do.

I still haven't figured out what Edith would do. When her brother Alex tells her that the future has changed and the world will end in seven years, what exactly does a vampire, even an absurdly durable one, do when faced with an angry seemingly omnipotent being? Other than kidnapping Nicolae so he can't sign the treaty, I mean?

Some characters from stories that have angels demons or gods involved I can sort of see what they'd do.

One of them would propose a simple plan to the nearest god who didn't mind delivering him to a suicide mission: "Get me as far into Heaven as you can, give me a knife, and I'll kill as many angels as I can and wound more. When I'm dead send the next parent," in hopes that Heaven would run out of angels before Earth ran out of parents. This is from a character whose entire plan in the story he comes from is to run and hide.

The following is somewhat difficult to write because the characters all have names, and they're presumably written down somewhere, but I don't remember them. Giving them new names seems wrong when I'm pretty sure they have names. There are also relationships that sort of matter for understanding it. [Woman] is narrator's wife, Cat, the one person whose name I remember, is the personification of Hope, [Demon] has been living for 20 years as a human, he actually grew up along side [youth]. Hopefully that's enough to understand what's going on. Also, when I first produced these characters there's no way in Hell someone at age 20 would be called a youth. They've been with me since high school.

Expanded somewhat for Slacktivist because I didn't like the dialog only format.

-

Twenty odd years since we'd left. We went to ground, got married in hiding, managed to settle down in a house without being found, helped out the odd divine revolution, and in the end it, in a moment, it all fell apart and I was back in Hell. I reached out with my right hand and took her left, to remind me that I wasn't alone. I wasn't sure whether that was good or bad. If my previous stay had taught me nothing else it was how much of a difference the right company makes. At the same time, you don't want the right company to be in Hell, even if you are.

We were back in Hell. And that was a much less hopeful thought than if it had just been me alone.

“Hasn't changed much,” she said.

“Home, sweet home,” I said.

For a time we walked alone, toward the gates. There was no reason to avoid going in, there was no way out of the dumping grounds where souls arrived, you could make your way to the the entrance to Hell proper on your own, or you could wait for the demons to make you. Then someone took my right hand I looked and saw Cat, it was the first time I had seen her look less than optimistic. She didn't say anything.

Soon after we saw another familiar face, [youth]. He was a kid, barely twenty. He was apparently ready for action. He expectantly asked, “What's the plan?”

I wasn't sure if he was addressing the question to me or [woman]. When she didn't answer, I did, “What makes you think we have a plan?”

“You got out of here before.”

“Oh yeah,” I told him. “It's simple. We just make our way down through all the circles of Hell.”

“Which are guarded by demons,” [woman] added. “Several of whom are probably still pissed off that we got by them the first time.”

“And once we make it to the bottom, this is after we've made it passed unbearable heat and unimaginable cold, we climb right down Lucifer's back.”

“Actually,” a new voice said, “Lucifer is out on parole.” I looked to see that [demon] had arrived, putting his arm around Cat. “It is the apocalypse after all.”

“Ok, so we jump down the giant gaping hole where Lucifer used to be,” [woman] said.

“Crossing the center of the earth and hoping our momentum carries us to the other side of the cavern before gravity pulls us back like a yo-yo,” Cat said.

“Then we climb up through the earth to the far side,” I said.

“Up the island mount of Purgatory,” [woman] said

“Into the Garden of Eden,” I said.

“Steal some fruit and run like Hell,” [woman] said.

[youth] was not impressed. Which is understandable because it was a bad plan. He asked, “Do we have a Plan B?” When [Woman] and I didn't respond he looked to [demon].

“Well don't look at me,” [demon] said, “There's no chance in the ninth circle we get out the way I did last time.”

“It wouldn't help anyway,” Cat said. “We're not running.”

I hadn't been expecting that, “We're not?”

“This isn't just about getting out of Hell. This is the apocalypse.”

“Told you,” [Demon] said.

Cat continued, “Every child on earth has been kidnapped. Moreover, if we don't do something to stop it, the world will be destroyed and almost everyone will be sent to Hell. There will be nowhere to run, and no one will escape.”

“So what is the plan?” the kid asked.

“The Garden of Eden is connected directly to Heaven. If we can make it that far, we can make it inside. Then we take the fight to the enemy,” Cat said.

“That's suicidal,” [youth] said.

“You're already dead,” [woman] said. She let that hang for a moment, then added, “This is the second time I've been dead.”

“If we're going to do this,” [demon] said, “I might know some people who'd prefer to slip in through the back door than wait for Armageddon. If you don't mind making some stops along the way, there are plenty of demons around who don't particularly like God or Lucifer.”

The gates of Hell had come into sight, inscribed, inexplicably, in Italian. [Woman] released my hand and said, “Bet I make it to the second circle first,” and started sprinting before I had processed it was a race. There was a point to it beyond being something to do. Hell was designed around the belief that people would try to get from the more painful parts to the less painful ones, not the other way around. The demons didn't expect anyone to run through the gate, at least not in that direction.

-

Just to carry on with Not Even The Angels In Heaven, I give you The Rapture:

In theory the solution should have been simple: move or remove the cars without drivers. At first this was what the angel did, some of the empty ones were easy to get rid of, those surrounded by occupied vehicles proved somewhat more difficult, in frustration she simply incinerated one and sent another in the general direction of the stratosphere, making sure, of course, that it would land in an unoccupied area. Still, for the most part it was simple. The driverless vehicles with occupants required more finesse and attention, but that wouldn't have been overly taxing either.

It quickly came to her attention that there were more out of control cars than there should have been, she briefly wondered if the Rapture had been more inclusive than anyone expected, then realized that the vehicles had drivers, it was simply that the drivers weren't paying attention. They were distracted by the empty spaces where their passengers had been. Apparently there had been a lot of children on the road when it happened and the drivers of those suddenly childless cars weren't paying attention to the road.

The greatest problem was that most drivers seemed to disapprove of her intervention. Throw an empty a car off the road here, levitate an occupied one to safety there, and all of a sudden everyone started swerving. Soon it seemed like the Rapture itself was the least of the road's problems, instead it was people's refusal to react calmly that was putting motorists in the greatest danger.

The exertion pushed her limits, at times her vision clouded, she staggered, she struggled. But in the end every vehicle in her domain was stopped. It wasn't perfect. Midway through she had felt the screeching dissonance of four souls being forced from their bodies in a collision she had been unable to prevent, and she was sure she would never forgive herself for allowing it to happen. Especially knowing that they had been sent to Hell.  But even with that failure, traffic had been safely stopped.

The frightened and confused motorists all heard a voice, which spoke with such force it reverberated throughout the metal and glass of their cars, “Speed limits exist for a reason. Always leave enough space between yourself and the car in front of you to react if it does something unexpected. In the event that something goes wrong on the roadway calmly slow down and pull off the side of the road. It's Not Rocket Science People!”

The angel then wearily made her way to the nearest hospital, to see if there was anything more she could do. She had never felt so drained, but she might be needed.

-

A wheel in good standing passed an airport on his way to deliver a message. He spared some of his eyes look watch the planes. He'd always been fascinated with human attempts to fly, more so since those attempts had started to succeed. Then he noticed something had changed, in a the cockpit of one of the planes was empty and, based on its sudden change in direction, the autopilot was not engaged.

In a moment he was inside the cockpit, a human form coalesced around him, and he calmly told that tower that the flight crew was missing and he needed them to repeat any important information. Once the plane was safely landed he offered to check up on any flights contact had been lost with.

The controller had been confused, but he managed to convince the controller to tell him about one such flight.  When he took control of that flight the controllers became much more willing to tell him where he was needed.

Throughout the day he found himself giving prayers of thanks to engineers for the invention of autopilot, without which there would have been significantly more carnage. By the time he'd landed his last flight he realized that he could never go back. God had left these people to die, he had abandoned his duties to save them. Clearly he and God weren't on the same side any more.

-

The guardian and his charge made their way out of the diner.

“What do we do?” she asked.

“Whatever you can,” the guardian told her. He looked around to see where they might be needed. The car accident had left no injuries. There didn't seem to be a need for medical attention, there did appear to be a need for comfort. A woman was sobbing on the ground next to an empty stroller, given that she wasn't looking for her lost child, it wasn't hard to imagine what she had just seen.

He knelt down, put his arms around the woman, and told her everything would be alright. In doing so he realized he had more advice to give to his charge, he looked at her and, making sure the woman couldn't see, mouthed the word, “Lie.” At this point, he figured, that was what they could do.

-

Death let physical location drop away and focused all of her attention at the crossroad between life and the afterlife. It was clear that God had changed things in response to her disobedience, souls were shuffled to Hell faster and more powerfully than ever before.

She worked as hard as she could as fast as she could, yet at the end of the day she had only managed to prevent three souls from moving into the next life.  Which meant that all but three had moved on to eternal torment.  She knew that, if she succeeded, the 'eternal' would be false, but the torment remained regardless.

The shade had remained safe, that was the only good news of the day.  The additional souls weighed her down, and she knew she'd need to pass them off to other angels or risk them all slipping into Hell.

She wasn't sure if that knowledge was a justification for not holding on to souls before.  She couldn't keep more than one from its destination for any length of time, which was how she had always justified sending souls to their afterlife without question before.  She couldn't stop the process, she could only make it more rocky.

But she questioned whether that was entirely true, if she had been saving souls from Hell, might she have found angels willing to anchor them?  She didn't know.

At least now she was standing in opposition to the one who sent them to Hell in the first place.

[Mary Kaye]

I'd really like it if you wrote more of this, Chris, whether here or elsewhere. And if you do you should really collect it *somewhere*, because the parts are awfully hard to find after a while.

[J]

Here's the link in case anyone needs it. ^^

Thanks! The last time I went back there was when I read an awesome story about Buck and Verna Z making up, in like April. It's good to see the old site coming back.

[kisekileia]

Chris, a blog doesn't have to be something fancy. There's no set of rules for how to run a blog. It would be perfectly reasonable to have a blog that's primarily a place to collect your writings, and I think a lot of people would enjoy having all your work, which is extremely imaginative and entertaining, accessible from one place.