Reading Strozier and Boyd’s essays and following up with Glorious Appearing by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, I–like pretty much everyone else who posted prior to my writing this response–thought that the ideas and concepts about fundamentalism that Strozier and Boyd outlined can be clearly and easily observed in Glorious Appearing. Considering the specific aspects of fundamentalism that Strozier and Boyd outline, “…dualistic thinking; paranoia and rage in a group context; an apocalyptic orientation that includes distinct perspectives on time, death and violence; a relationship to charismatic leadership; and a totalized conversion experience” (Strozier, Boyd 11) alongside Glorious Appearing, I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of scenes in Lahaye and Jenkins’s text fit Strozier and Boyd’s criteria for fundamentalism perfectly.
Moving on from that, one thing that I found particularly curious while reading Glorious Appearing is how it–often awkwardly–tries to balance suspense with absolute certainty. Especially during the beginning of the novel, I found myself wondering, if these characters are so sure that Jesus is coming and that the dead will rise, why should the scenes where characters are near death grip me?
Following this line of thought, if one truly believes (as many of the main characters do) that what’s happening in the Book of Revelation is coming true, shouldn’t there be no worry, no strife, no suspense or wondering? Indeed, the characters often seem to vacillate on this point as well, not sure whether or not to act with urgency. It cheapened the action, and made parts of the tale feel flimsy (the writing didn’t help at all, either). Looking back at Tolkin’s film, I’m actually just realizing the importance of the fact that he took liberties with what John of Patmos wrote, as it creates a certain air of ambiguity and improves the story, one that Glorious Appearing sorely lacked.
“I found myself wondering, if these characters are so sure that Jesus is coming and that the dead will rise, why should the scenes where characters are near death grip me? ”
Interesting blog. I found that sentence above particularly fascinating. I felt the same sensation, but was surprised at how satisfied it was to read the ending that had been promised to the reader before they opened the book. Do you think that sort of satisfaction in familiarity justifies not the slow (but existing) rate of change in religious apocalyptic legend?
It’s interesting to me that you felt satisfied by the ending, because I left the experience a bit underwhelmed, though I suspect that had more to do with the writing than the actual story.
I think in general we are comforted by familiarity, which definitely contributes slow rate of change in the apocalyptic legend, though I’d be hard-pressed to say it’s the only reason, or even the biggest reason.