But Is It Art?
I've never read a "Left Behind" novel. But this site makes the argument that the books based on "Revelations" are not novels at all.
Are they novels, then? Oh, probably not. The characters exist only to represent pieces on an ideological chess board. But in that sense, G.B. Shaw's plays are no different just more artfully written. And I expect Shaw was raunchy enough to have got right away the raunchy double-entendre in "Left Behind."
In this agreement, LaHaye can be seen as the puppet master over writer Jenkins. Below that, Jenkins himself is the puppet master of the characters in the books. This shows greatly in the novels, where characters are subservient to both the prophetic outline LaHaye has provided, as well as how Jenkins has to fit characters into that story in order to have them move around the plot like human characters do. Under this heavy-handed authority, both by LaHaye at the top, and Jenkins at the second layer, characters are created that do not have individual souls or free wills of their own, characters that are not allowed to explore freely what makes their individual characters unique. Overall, there is little difference between characters other than that they are on the side of Good or on the side of Evil. Their actions, thoughts and motivations are one-dimensional.
Are they novels, then? Oh, probably not. The characters exist only to represent pieces on an ideological chess board. But in that sense, G.B. Shaw's plays are no different just more artfully written. And I expect Shaw was raunchy enough to have got right away the raunchy double-entendre in "Left Behind."