The first thing I’d like to touch on is the title, Lucifer’s Hammer. I think that something alone the line of God’s Hammer would have been more fitting. Obviously the wacko minister would agree with this title because he viewed the comet as God’s work, a way to think out the population and destroy all of the evil, man-made atrocities. There were a lot of people who also, in a way, got what they wanted when the Hammer fell. Harvey Randall, for example, was let go from all of his familial and financial obligations. Gary Vance was brought back from the verge of suicide after the comet struck because he felt he now had something to live for. Maureen Jellison finally felt as though she had a purpose in life as well. The novel is filled with character’s who flourish after the comet strikes.
I suppose Lucifer’s Hammer is an appropriate title because it refers to an event that killed the majority of the earth’s population and lead people to murder, loot, and cannibalize. It’s much easier to point to a devastating event such as the Hamner-Brown comet and characterize it as the work of Satan rather than the work of God. Perhaps this apocalyptic event was merely just a chance for the few survivors to find a real purpose and calling in life. However, a title like God’s Hammer might put too much focus or sway on the evangelical aspect of the novel. Since the only real mention of religion is associated with the aforementioned wacko minister, a title involving the word, God may have narrowed the reader’s field of vision.
Adding on to your last sentence, I feel as though you are right about that one. I think if one were to cultivate an opinion of religion from this novel, they would fall terribly shortsighted. It’s easy to say that religion has no purpose in the secular or industrial workings of the world and even easier to say that religion is a detriment to ‘society’ if one were to mold out religion from the little clay that’s given from Lucifer’s Hammer. I say this because, as Melanie has pointed out, religion is only referred to when Armitage is involved in the story. Being a pro-industry minded novel, either by chance or intention, the authors have allowed a religious character to play out the role of the antagonist. Perhaps, it is easier for plot movement when you have a religious leader become the anti-industrialist (since there are less plot holes to cover concerning societal mores and worldly reason) so it just happened a fanatical priest was chosen to play this role. Other than the whole mission to destroy the power plant, the only time “religion” is put in a bad light is when the ‘prayer wardens’ block traffic out to high-ground from the cities (and gratifyingly, to some, are hunted down for their folly). Not having a well-rounded picture of religion in this novel doesn’t mean the novel or the authors are anti-religious, there could be a fair chance that it may have no fulfilled a purpose in the plot – it was just unnecessary to do so.
If anything is being chastised in this book, it’s probably cannibalism. I haven’t read many novels that cover cannibalism – in fact I’ve only read one other and that was Stirling’s Dies the Fire. In that book, cannibals aren’t really regarded as humans and are killed off en masse in a manner involving less conscience weight than squashing a bug. Before digressing into a never ending discourse about absolute human morals vs. constructed acceptables – it would just be interesting to see cannibalism across a spectrum of novels from different cultures.