Heinlein

[duchess of malfi]

And STILL duchess doesn't go for SiaSL! ARGH!!!! (You're killing me, dollface! )

OK, you handsome studmuffin. I will put it at the top of my TBR pile.

[Avatar]

and also the one that involves a brain transplant the title of which I cannot for the life of me recall.

I had the misfortune to have read that brain transplant book, and thought it seriously sucked. I was unwilling to try anything else by Heinlein for years as a result. However, I have since been talked into reading Starship Troopers, and really enjoyed it. I have kept an eye out for a book called Podkayne of Mars, one of his juveniles, as it has also been strongly recommended to me, but I have never been bale to locate a copy.

The brain transplant one, (I Will Fear No Evil) was a partiocularly sad case. It was written practically on his death-bed, and was poorly (non-existantly) edited after he died, then published post-humously, IIRC.

It's pretty much considered the worst of his full-length novels. Not that I think it's justifiable necessarily, but as he was unable to do his own edit and polish of it, the book definitely suffered. I've read it a few times, and while I think there is some potential, there's a lot of rambling that he would have edited out himself I have no doubt.

Glad to hear you're going to try Stranger though Duchess.

Trapper, so many to choose from... I recommend you avoid the longer novels to start with. A really excellent shorter one, (and perhaps my introduction to Heinlein, IIRC), is Double Star. That one is pretty light, and a story fun enough that I reread it every couple of years.

Also, the Revolt in 2100 that I recommended to Foul is great.

--A

[Sandgorgon rider]

It may not appeal to everyone, but one that I always enjoyed was Farmer in the Sky. I guess it always appealed both to my interests in science and my love of farming/gardening. The ability to farm with no weeds, no harmful bugs and no plant diseases sounds wonderful to me. Combine the lack of pests with the low gravity and farming would be a dream.

[Avatar]

One of the ones I haven't read.

--A

[duchess of malfi]

I am a few chapters into A Stranger in a Strange Land and so far I am enjoying it. I am reading the uncut version, which was released a year or so ago. The publisher made the author cut huge chunks out of the story when it was originally published, as they deemed it possibly too offensive to too many people. I take that to mean either oddles of sex, or violence, religion, or politics - or some combo. I guess I will see as I get further into the book.

Hopefully life will calm down a bit, so I can have a bit more reading time.

[taraswizard]

I will Fear no Evil was out in the midddle 1970s and Robert Anson died in 1988, he was no where near his death bed. However, that is around the time he had some other serious health issues. FWIW, many Heinlein aficianados reserve the judgements of his least worth works to Friday and Podkayne of Mars; IOW, many Heinlein fans like IWFnE.

Comments to Duchesss the original published version of was cut about 20% from its original manuscript, and for all the reasons you cite. About 5 yrs. ago or so Virginia Heinlein, RA's widow, found an uncut version of the manuscript among RA's papers archived at UC Santa Cruz and through some technicalities of copyright regulations she was able to repulish it in its uncut version.

[lucimay]

Time Enough for Love

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

and...

[Fist and Faith]

Sorry for the delay in responding, duchess. I'm VERY pleased!!! I hope you're enjoying it in the little time you have to read. Not that I can imagine anyone not enjoying it, but, as they say, it takes all kinds.

[Avatar]

I will Fear no Evil was out in the midddle 1970s and Robert Anson died in 1988, he was no where near his death bed. However, that is around the time he had some other serious health issues. FWIW, many Heinlein aficianados reserve the judgements of his least worth works to Friday and Podkayne of Mars; IOW, many Heinlein fans like IWFnE.

I'll have to see if I can find why I think that. I do remember saying earlier that I'd seen some discrepancy somewhere about the date, will dig up my copy and see, and try and find where I read it.

Personally, although not one of my favourites, I've never had too much trouble with it, except for thinking it was "untidy."

And I like Friday. One of my favourites in fact.

--A

[Trapper]

Time Enough for Love

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

and...

Gasp, I remember that book very well. Even though I read it during my Heinlein phase (mid-'80s) I wasn't sure if it was by him.

Very strange book, but the premise of it was very memorable.

Don't want to put in any spoilers, but brown gunk under the fingernails and the mystery of the 13th floor. Blew my adolescent mind!!! I don't remember much else except the revelation of what it was that JH did all day.

Odd, odd story.

[Insomniac By Choice]

I liked Heinlein when I first began reading him, but by the third book, I'd grown absolutely sick of his need to insert himself into the stories as the absolute, infallible opinion on everything.

I read Starship Troopers when I was a young teenager and liked it, maybe because Rico's teacher wasn't as central to the story, or maybe because I was at the age where I wanted absolute, infallible opinions. But I thought it was a pretty good book and made some pretty good points.

Stranger in a Strange Land was next, and while the first third was great and second third was very good, the last part of the book was horrendous. Jubal Hardshaw may be the most unintentionally annoying character ever created, mainly because it's so painfully obvious that he's Robert Heinlein himself.

Then I tried Time Enough For Love and got more of the same. The message stayed the same and the delivery didn't get any better. Heinlein is a great writer and I enjoyed the science fiction he came up with, but I really can't stand anyone beating me over the head with a message, especially when it's something like "Taboos of incest and polygamy are outdated, but homosexuality is just crazy".

I read the Forever War by Joe Haldeman a short time after my journey through Heinlein and found his presentation much better. Heinlein is still crucial to sci-fi for elevating it above pulp and giving it something to argue against, but I don't really like the things of his I've read.

[Sandgorgon rider]

I am a big Heinlein fan, but I also did not care much for Stanger in a Strange Land or Time Enough For Love. I was also unimpressed by much of his later work like Friday and The Cat Who Walks Through Walls. I guess I have always been more of a "ray guns and rocket ships" kind of science fiction fan rather than some of the more psychological and sociological type of stories.

[Insomniac By Choice]

I don't see a reason to writing something if it's not going to be psychological, sociological, or hell, have significance. Otherwise it's just "idle and extravagant stories" taking up space on a page or bookshelf.

[Sandgorgon rider]

I don't see a reason to writing something if it's not going to be psychological, sociological, or hell, have significance. Otherwise it's just "idle and extravagant stories" taking up space on a page or bookshelf.

What's the matter with writing merely to entertain or amuse your readers? Not every story has to have some deep significance to be worthy of existence. Particularly with science fiction it can be fun to read about futuristic technologies, see how they manage to travel interstellar space or what weapons they use. Throw in a galactic empire, a few buxom babes and a dashing hero and you can have a fun read.

[Avatar]

I certainly agree with SGR that there's nothing wrong with stories for stories sake.

Personally, Stranger, Time Enough, Friday & The Cat who Walked Through Walls are some of my favourites though. I've always preferred the social/psychological-based ones I think.

And while I don't buy the infallibility of his (or any )opinions, I do or have agreed with many of them.

I must disagree about the percieved anti-homosexual bias though. As I was recently saying to Duchess on this very topic, the instances where it comes up are, IIRC, not usually part of his polemic, but rather character issues.

In addition, towards the end of Stranger, it's implied fairly strongly that within Smith's "Church," sexual bonding is not limited to opposite genders, and further no "wrong" is implied thereby.

Ben, who has become a water brother but who has not received the training that normal church members receive, comments at one point that two men are kissing, but nothing about the act seems out of place or unmasculine.

By the novel's end, it seems to promote a kind of general bisexuality, implying that sexual bonding can occur between any water-brothers, regardless of gender.

...two negative references to homosexuality [in SiaSL] have been interpreted by some readers as being homophobic, but both deal with Jill's hang-ups, and one is a discussion of Jill's thoughts. It is therefore unclear if they reflect Heinlein's point of view.

In addition, homosexuality is ill-regarded, but accepted as necessary in an overwhelmingly male society, by the point of view character in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

Homosexuality is treated with approval — even gusto — in books such as the 1970 I Will Fear No Evil, which posits the social recognition of six innate genders, consisting of all the combinations of male and female with straight, gay, and bisexual.

The protagonist of The Cat Who Walks Through Walls recalls a homosexual experience with a Boy Scouts leader, which he didn't find unpleasant.

Anyway, regardless of how one chooses to interpret these points, I must say that it never occurred to me to think of any of his work as being anti-homosexual. *shrug*

Oh Taras...this is why I thought what I did about I Will Fear No Evil:

Heinlein suffered from life-threatening peritonitis while working on this novel, and it is generally believed that his wife Virginia handled much of the editing. Detractors of this novel sometimes invoke Heinlein's overall ill health as a reason for its perceived poor quality.

--A

[taraswizard]

I'm probably contributing to this thread more than I should. However,...

Chronologically, Heinlein was one year younger than Robert E. Howard of Cross Plains, TX. I'm sure they never met.

There's a commune in California that's trying to emulate the social/sexual mores of SiaSL and it's called someting like 'Church of the Nest', 'Church of all World', or 'Nest of all Worlds'. I stumbled upon it when doing a Heinlein google search a few years ago.

Jim Frenkel a Tor editor, lives in Madison, WI, told me once that both Podkayne and her brother were characters based on real people Virginia and Robert knew. The childern of fairly well known Washington beltway types (not siblings in real life).

Regarding the disdain and disregard that Friday is held, please go back to this thread's first page. Although, I like it.

[Insomniac By Choice]

Though I don't have it in front of me, I do remember an explicit reference by Smith about the "wrongness" of homosexuality, and I didn't really see kisses on cheeks as signs of sexuality.

Anyway, that was a side point to what I meant. If he hated gays, it's really not important, I was just using it as an example of what I saw as the ridiculousness of the philosophy he was lecturing the reader to accept, or if he wasn't lecturing, using arguing Hardshaw to argue with straw men and women and soundly and utterly defeat them in every debate.

You're free to your own opinions about stories, but my opinion is that if you're not going to say anything, you shouldn't bother opening your mouth to make noise.

[duchess of malfi]

Having just read the book...it was not Smith who said that homosexuality was wrong. It was Jill who thought that. In her thoughts she said to herself that she was glad no fellows had come on to Smith because he might grok the basic wrongness of homosexuality and kill the gay guy. She also said that nine out of ten rape victims do something to encourage/deserve the crime.

Both of these things disturbed me terribly, quite frankly.

However, Avatar and I had a discussion about it, and he has pretty much convinced me that these are the character Jill's hangups rather than Heinlein's.

Nonetheless - when I read mroe Heinlein, I will be going after some of his classic juvenile books rather than the ones with weird sex stuff in them.

[taraswizard]

Rather than venturing into the pulpish miasma of the juveniles, I would recommend Moon is a Harsh Mistress or Citizen of the Galaxy or Double Star.

IMO, the juveniles are not like juveniles of today (examples, Rowling, McCaffrey, Nina Hofmann) where YA lit can be enjoyed by adults. From my memory of the juveniles they're what one might imagine the 'He-Man club from the Our Gang serials would write' (that sounds harsh).

I know I'm sending too many messages to this thread.

[lucimay]

Time Enough for Love

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

and...

Gasp, I remember that book very well. Even though I read it during my Heinlein phase (mid-'80s) I wasn't sure if it was by him.

Very strange book, but the premise of it was very memorable.

Don't want to put in any spoilers, but brown gunk under the fingernails and the mystery of the 13th floor. Blew my adolescent mind!!! I don't remember much else except the revelation of what it was that JH did all day.

Odd, odd story.

NO KIDDING MAN. blew my teenage mind as well!!!