for King continued to temporize.nWhy? Because “the idea that nonadultsnof any race might play a leadingnrole in political events had simply failednto register on anyone” — includingnhim. Thus he, and liberal America,nwould have reached an impasse had itnnot been for Branch’s heroes, the blacknstudents who organized themselves asnthe Student Nonviolent CoordinatingnCommittee (SNCC) in 1960. Thesenstudents. Branch insists, won the battlenfor King’s soul. He describes them innthe most effusive, yet paradoxical.nterms: human but somehow superhuman,nsinners yet saints. Before ourneyes, even their apparent vices transformnthemselves dialectically into revolutionarynvirtues. If they repudiatentheir parents and abandon their spousesnand children, they do so in order tonbe free to serve a higher purpose.nSome of them achieved fame: MarionnBarry (the present, beleaguered, mayornof Washington, DC), John Lewis,nRobert Moses. Most, however, remainedninvisible, nameless foot soldiersnin a “grass roots” army.nImpatient with waiting, these youngnpeople poured contempt on such adultnnotions as thoughtful reflection andnconciliation. When challenged to defendnhis views, John Lewis wouldnsimply chant, “We’re gonna marchntonight.” And so they did. Further­n36/CHRONICLESnmore, they sat in at segregated lunchncounters in Tennessee, North Carolina,nand Georgia, labored against overwhelmingnodds to register Negro votersnin Mississippi, took “Freedom Rides”non interstate buses, went to jail, andnrefused bail. The more they sufferednfor their actions, the more eager theynwere to assume greater risks and tonabsorb worse punishment.nTo King’s disdnct discomfort, theyndemanded to know, “Where is yournbody?” At first, he could only stammer,n”I think I should choose the timenand place of my Golgotha,” an identificationnwith Christ that the studentsnfound naive and embarrassing. Was thenfamous leader a mere clone of “DaddynKing,” a respected preacher who knewnhis place in a white man’s world?nOnce, when the family patriarch counselednpatience and boasted that he hadnmoved in reform circles for 30 years,nan exasperated student shouted,n”That’s what’s wrong.”nSlowly, but surely. King Jr. began toncome around. Impressed by thennational attention that “confrontationalnwitness” achieved, he defended thenSNCC students against Wilkins and thenNAACP, and took to the streets himselfnIn their company he learned whatnit meant to be put behind bars. Beforenlong he was urging the election ofn”young people” to the board of hisnSouthern Christian Leadership Conference.nAt the critical juncture innBranch’s melodrama, King achieves anmystical union with students who, onlynminutes before, had subjected him tonwithering criticism. Recognizing at lastnthe superior wisdom of the young, thenleader marshals newly-discovered innernresources and prepares to launch anSNCC-style campaign against segregationnin Birmingham. The centerpiecenof that campaign Branch calls “thenchildren’s miracle”: the sending ofnyoung children, some not yet in theirnteens, into the streets and jails. JamesnBevel, one of the most militant of thenBirmingham organizers, bristles whennparents object: “Against your Mama,”nhe advises the sacrificial lambs, “younhave a right to make this witness.” Cannthere have been any more cynical andnunconscionable exploitation of innocents?nBranch interrupts his narrative — tonbe taken up again in a second volume.nnnPillar of Fire —in 1963, after thenMarch on Washington, where Kingndelivered his famous “I Have anDream” speech, and the assassinationnof President Kennedy. We may be surenthat he will find ways to justifynSNCC’s subsequent history, dominatednas it was by such violent and unsavorynspokesmen as Stokely Carmichaelnand H. “Rap” Brown. Indeed, henprovides us with a preview of his concludingnstudy’s theme in a revealingnaside: “As [Robert] Moses relentlesslynpursued the difficulties of universalnsuffrage, the enemy no longer appearednto be ignorant rednecks sonmuch as universal forces of politics,nand the purpose of the civil rightsnmovement not so much Christiannenlightenment — teaching people tonbe charitable and fair — as political revolution.”nBut even if Carmichael and Brownnhad never appeared on the scene,nSNCC and the radicalized King wouldnhave much for which to answer. ThenNew York Times, which regularly expressednsympathy for the civil rightsnmovement, put it plainly in 1961:n”Non-violence that deliberately provokesnviolence is a logical contradiction.”nWorse, it is a historical contradiction,nfor once summoned, violencenhas proved to be all but impossible toncontain. That was as true in the civilnrights movement as it was in Gandhi’snmuch vaunted “nonviolent” movementnin India. During their last years.nKing and Gandhi brought violencenwith them wherever they went; that,nafter all, was the point.nIf any of this disturbs Branch, hendoes not let on. In a tragic way, ofncourse, King’s martyrdom surroundednhim with a still greater aura. In recentnyears he has seemed to some to be andeity, criticism of whom is a form ofnblasphemy. To liberals and neoconservativesnhe appears responsible, democratic,nand nonviolent, less abrasiventhan Jesse Jackson — and safely buried;nto the radical left he is the incarnationnof the entire civil rights movement,nwhich itself gives life to a much morenencompassing radicalism. As a friendnof radical causes. Branch knows thatnthe revolutionary spirit of SNCC,ncompromised by its association withnthe violence of the late 1960’s, can livenon only by filling the fallen leader’snmemory. n