Mind Map Thoughts

Like Chad, I too had a visceral reaction to the second half of this book. In fact, perhaps why I didn't say more in class was that it was an overwhelming and personal issue. I'll try to address a few concerns here:

In an article entitled “Ethnography or Psychography?” from a book about ethnographic methods in composition studies, Keith Rhodes issues an excellent caution to researchers that I find especially pertinent to Sharon Crowley. He writes that oftentimes in ethnographic study, “The inquiry becomes less a question of 'What is the cultural situation of writing education?' and more a question of What is lacking in these students?' No matter how benevolently this last question is framed, it reeks of early anthropology that looked at the 'deficiencies' of foreign cultures paternally” (28). From examining the the map I made this week, it seems that the sources Crowley is citing discuss the “cultural situation” of evangelical Christianity, but Crowley's analysis seems to be more of a “What's wrong with these people?”

For example, Amy Frykholm's Rapture Culture, an ethnographic study of the readers of the Left Behind books, opens with a moving and candid story about Frykholm's own spirituality, how it conflicts with her feminist views, and her admission that “I could not resolve the tension between my dislike for the books and my appreciation of their readers” (9). James Barr minimizes the impact of fundamentalism by saying that it's more of an “ecumenical problem” of a radical group outside of mainstream Christianity, and that it will have no impact on Biblical scholars and theologians (338). Paul Boyer adds multiple qualifications to the statistics that Crowley unproblematically cites, acknowledging the differing degrees to which a belief in apocalyptism influences one's daily life (2). Susan Harding, in The Book of Jerry Falwell, examines the discourses of witnessing and the “born-again” movement. Overall, I would say these writers are less horrified than fascinated, less repulsed than intrigued. They don't see hegemony – they see complexity (Jeff Rice too criticizes Crowley for missing the opportunity to discuss “rhetorical complexity”) They seem to be talking about real people as opposed to a disembodied discourse.

Another problem evident from the map is who Crowley uses as “examples” of the Christian Fundamentalist movement. Particularly laughable was her portrayal of LaHaye as an “intellectual” -- LaHaye is not a professor, does not publish in academic journals, and perhaps the reason that his non-fiction has sold so badly is that people don't buy his crap. As Jeff Rice points out, he is an entertainer. Crowley fails to recognize real Christian intellectuals. In fact, Crowley fails to recognize the African American fundamentalist community at all – the only people she allows to speak for the movement are rich white men. I assume she ignores this community because although it is apocalyptist, it also works for social justice. In short, it complicates her view of the wildly conservative Christian, so she chooses to ignore it. Oddly, Al Sharpton is praised for his “artful and moving” rhetoric (26), but Crowley fails to see that he too espouses apocalyptist beliefs (are these artful and moving too?). I would say that Crowley sets up a “straw man” argument, except that Tim LaHaye is a straw man. Other examples: Pat Robertson, Bob Jones, Jerry Falwell? (Was Tammy Faye Bakker not available that day?)