Ah, Robert Heinlein.  Extremely successful science fiction author.
Egotistical dirty old man who was oblivious to the fact that his
reality checks were bouncing like Flubber.  Let's drift out of the
mystery quote item and tell all 'bout what we think of the once and
Future Historical RAH.

33 responses total.

        I still assert that, from what I've read of Heinlien, he had a fairly
decent batting average as far as social commentary through science fiction
goes.  

  Perhaps someone should link this to the scifi conference as well..

  I suppose my opinions on Heinlein are pretty clear from my comments
  in the mystery quote item but I should temper them a bit by saying
  that I have nevertheless read and enjoyed (to varying extent) a
  fairly substantial portion of what he's written..


  My main complaint, I suppose, is with fans who try to make him into
  something he's definitely not.  He wrote decent "gimmick" stories,
  which occasionally centered around interesting ideas, and he was
  *very* successful at writing the sort of strapping adolescent adventure
  yarns I've heard described as "Boy's Life" in Space, but he was not
  a particularly gifted writer or a deep philosopher..

  One only has to read some of his longer fiction to see what I mean,
  particularly anything from later in his career when he was obviously
  trying to go beyond the *very* limited parameters of his early career.
  Almost none of his characters have any depth at all, there's no sort
  of emotional engagement with the actors in his dramas -- it's less like
  reading a novel than it is like watching a morality play (occasionally
  a very preachy one..)

  I very much believe that the key to Heinlein's enduring popularity is
  the accessibility of his work to 10- to 13-year-old boys who are just
  discovering science fiction and my private theory (as mentioned earlier
  in the mystery quote item) is that the further you are from being a
  13-year-old boy when you first encounter his writing, the less you will
  think of it when you are an adult and the less credit you will attribute
  to Heinlein for introducing ideas about society and government (because
  the older you were, the more likely you were to have encountered very
  similar ideas elsewhere, first..)

  Again, I don't want to be *too* hard on the guy.  Within the limitations
  of his work, it's quite enjoyable, I just dislike seeing him held in
  reverence as some sort of patron saint of science fiction.

Right.  He started writing to pay the mortgage, and kept doing it because
NOT writing made him sick.  No great virtue in that.  :)

"There is nothing wrong with writing.  Just make sure the door is locked,
and wash your hands afterwards" (_Time_Enough_for_Love, as I recall).

        A number of authors have written pulp fiction for the majority of their
life and then risen above it - Philip K. Dick and Marion Zimmer Bradley come
immediately to mind, as well as Clive Barker, though that's another genre.

        I, too, would not like to hear Heinlein held up as a patron saint of
science fiction.  He clearly doesn't deserve that.  But I do hold that I have
read coherent explanations of some interesting and fairly original
philosophies by Heinlien that mark him as a better author than most of the
pulp mill, and that as a social commentator Heinlien has successfully
predicted a number of things which have come to pass.

 Like the use of slave labor to colonize Venus and convict labor on
 the Moon?  Or maybe the ascendancy of hereditary technical guilds
 which jealously guard their secrets to maintain a monopoly on power?
 (OK, I *was* a Unix sysadmin, but I've been deprogrammed (as it were))
 Make enough predictions and you're bound to get some of them right..


 I think a much better recipient for the sort of adulation Heinlein
 receives would be Theodore Sturgeon.  He's a significantly better writer
 (though again, not brilliant), wrote a comparable number of stories, and
 introduced just as many interesting ideas (in my opinion, at least.)
 Like Heinlein, the quality of his latter work is markedly different than
 his pulpy origins, unlike Heinlein it generally deals with less sweeping,
 more personal themes.

        That's why I was referring to "batting average".  *sigh*

        If you gotta' grind an axe on the admiral, you bette pick yer work
        and specify some damn good reasons.

        That being said, I'll freely admit that his last few works - when
        he felt that he was significant enough to get away with "adult
        themes" - sucked rocks. TEFL, for example.

        With that caveat, TMISAHM, "Grok" and others are classic. Face it,
        the man was at his best when you don't have to suffer his
        "pyschosexual" babble.

        Go on, make my day - rape his "juvenile fiction" (make me laugh).
        Show me that "The Glory Road" or TMISAHM are "bad". Pick one.

  How about if I choose some of his other works, instead?  I submit for  
  your consideration "Have Spacesuit, Will Travel" and "The Rolling Stones"

  The info on Heinlein's books at www.amazon.com proclaims:

   > The only author to have written four Hugo Award-winning novels,
   > Heinlein is considered the greatest science fiction writer who
   > ever lived. 

  It then goes on to describe:

   > Have Spacesuit, Will Travel
   > ----
   > One minute Kip Russell was walking about in his backyard,
   > testing out an old space suit and dreaming about going to the
   > Moon -- and the next he was out cold, the captive of an insidious
   > space pirate.  The whole thing seemed like a bad dream until
   > Kip discovered there were other prisoners on board, and they
   > were all on their way to the Moon -- and a fate worse than death!

  and 

   > The Rolling Stones
   > ----
   > When the Stone twins made up their minds to leave Lunar City in a
   > secondhand spaceship, they hadn't planned on having their whole
   > family accompany them. But the Stones were not your ordinary
   > Lunar family -- no way! -- and their voyage through the solar
   > system sure proved it.
   > 
   > What began as a simple business expedition to Mars soon mushroomed
   > into a dangerous situation when Grandma Stone was lost in space. Then,
   > just when everything seemed to be getting better, a Martian flatcat
   > came aboard and fouled up the works...

  The prosecution could probably rest at this point but I also want to
  talk about the book that's now published as "Sixth Column" (I wish I
  could remember the original title..) 

  In this treasure-trove of xenophobia, the U.S. is invaded by,
  essentially, The Yellow Peril, straight from central casting circa 1941
  -- an insidious "Panasian" army craftily conquers the freedom-loving,
  but insufficiently vigilant U.S., and begins brutally suppressing the
  American people. 

  What I find *really* interesting about "Sixth Column" is not the
  subject matter -- it was a very different time when he wrote it and I'm
  not all that interested in pasing judgment on the policical correctness
  of his writing -- but the reactions to the book in the Amazon "reader
  reviews" section.  They make fascinating reading, especially the ones
  that give the book (a wholly undeserved) five out of five stars while
  simultaneously qualifying their reviews with unconvincing assertions
  that "it's not as racist as people say.."  

  I've read the book and frankly, even ignoring political considerations
  it's simply not a five-star book -- only those who were blinded by the
  Heinlein Effect could consider it worthy of the highest acclaim.
  Perhaps there's something in Heinlein's writing that warps the minds of
  people who encounter it before their critical-thinking faculties are
  sufficiently developed..  ;-)

_Sixth_Column_ was the original title; I read it as _The_Day_After_Tomorrow_.

What, pray tell, is "TEFL"?  I thought I had read everything he wrote (except
_The_Notebooks_of_Lazarus_Long_), but I can't place "TEFL".

I dunno; _Spacesuit_ and _The_Rolling_Stones_ were fun to read, when I
read them.  I didn't ask much more than that of them.

TEFL is _Time Enough for Love_, from which (i think) _The Notebooks of
Lazarus Long_ are exerpted.

<!SLAP> Of course.  And I even mentioned it, above.

I just re-read _The_Number_of_the_Beast_.  I didn't much like the way he
linked back into his Future History stories (or the way he established
that _Stranger_ wasn't part of FH), but it wasn't as bad as the way Asimov
linked his Robot and Foundation stories; I stopped reading Asimov after
_Robots_of_Dawn_.

I enjoyed TEFL.

   re #9:  I'm not saying there's anything particularly wrong about       
   "Have Spacesuit, Will Travel" and "The Rolling Stones" -- they         
   succeed at being what they're supposed to be.  However, I submit
   that were it not for the disproportionate reputation Heinlein
   enjoys, practically nobody read them.  There's plenty of cheesy
   juvenile stuff from that period that's just as good (or better)
   that nobody's ever heard of, largely because it's *not* Heinlein.

   Pete offered "Glory Road" (which I have not read) and "The Moon
   is a Harsh Mistress" (which I have, and which I think is one of
   his best.)  I didn't think that was a fair standard by which to
   judge so I offered an alternative.  Presumably the truth lies
   somewhere in between.

   --

   One thing that definitely *does* bother me about Heinlein is his
   consistent "people are sheep" theme.  In far too many of his
   stories, a large group of ineffectual "civilians" stand around
   complaining and doing nothing helpful -- often they're actively
   unhelpful and the hero has to deal with them in addition to the
   real problem.  Almost invariably ordinary people are short-sighted
   fools who can't accept the truth, which is a vision held by the
   hero and a few of his close friends. 

   What can I say?  After the fifteenth or sixteenth novel this sort
   of misanthropic world-view wears a bit thin and I start to get really
   fed up with the incredible smugness of his young, clean-cut, morally
   and righteously pure ubermenschen..

   --

   And as long as I'm being the devil's advocate who argues against
   the canonization of Saint Heinlein, let me also take a moment to
   mention books like "Starman Jones", which could easily have been
   written by a Heinlein simulator program.  For every book or story
   which stands out as memorable, there are at least four or five
   others whose plots I cannot easily distinguish in my memory because
   they're so paint-by-numbers..

  OK, I've vented a bit.. 

  (Just imagine how I'd flame if I hadn't enjoyed most of the books..)

        I don't think that anyone is arguing for the "canonization of Saint
Heinlein" - I was just saying, personally, that I'd found some redeeming value
in his works.  Debunking his lesser books won't change that.

  (nobody here is, perhaps..  whoever wrote the Amazon blurb on him
   might've been..)

  Nor am I claiming that his books are without redeeming value, I just
  think he's highly (very highly) overrated..  I'm certain that many of
  his books would now be completely forgotten if they didn't have his
  name on the cover.

Although I agree that Heinlein isn't the greatest SF writer ever, he has
written some brilliant books. Of course, he also used the ""Magic Stick" thing
too often for my taste (in Sixth Column and TMIAHM).

Besides, how many SF authors (besides L. Ron Hubbard) can claim that their
works led to the creation of a new religion?

  (how many would want to?)

I just find it interesting that SF is the driving force for modern myths. Look
at 2001, or Star Wars. Sure, they may use mythological motifs as old as
recorded history, but they're more likely to create new religions than
fantasy. Fantasy tends to rehash old mythologies, with mixed results.

Heinlein managed to create a framework for a "popular" Pagan faith with SIASL,
namely the Church of All Worlds. The ideas he expressed in that novel sparked
the creation of a new religious faith. Many may not find that a laudable goal,
but I think it's a great accomplishment.

At least the CAW is willing to say their philosophy originally stemmed from
a work of fiction, as opposed to Hubbard's attempt to label Scientology as
an actual "science." 

Note: I realize that using "mythological motifs as old as recorded history"
and "rehasing old mythologies" can amount to the same thing, and is probably
a matter of semantics. The difference, I guess, is in the terminology. If
there's enough interest in the topic of religion spawned from or influenced
by fiction, I'll create a new item for it.

        I never said the Admiral was a saint and freely admit that a lot
        of his (later) works play on his name-value to get away with
        r/x rated garbage.. Of course, I often wonder if THOSE were the
        "ghost-written" works: they "feel" ALLLL WRONG.

        His "juvenile" stuff had three goals: 1) sell a story; 2) please
        the Moral-Minority; 3) entertain & entice kids.

        I see no flaw in that approach, since he wanted to eat.

        The "yellow menace"/"nasty commies" approach is also valid: look
        at the written & publish dates. It was a valid fear and "timely".

        The GR and NOTB stories were equally GOOD - given the man was
        certainly deteriorating while writing the latter. Any of the LL
        books are an equally "good read". He only "fails" when he tries to
        project the current "acceptable behavior & writing" styles on
        previously acceptable characters. And, I still maintain, some of
        his late stuff must have been Ghostwritten by some idiot that
        hadn't a clue wtf the characters were about, let alone the plot.

        You want *BAD*? Look at ANY of the books following "Dune" - *tell*
        me they ain't Ghost-Writers w/o a clue..

        Of course, I'm still gonna' root for Niven, Ing, Drake and a slew
        of others.. The Admiral showed it COULD be done - and how. The
        others add polish that Asimov, Bradberry and Clarke at their BEST
        can't match..

Re: dune followups:  you just don't like the ghola!  :-)

        Actually, the "ghola" wasn't my problem.. It was the directions 
        the story went off into..

        Hmm, I still gotta' get a new copy of dune.. All 5 of my copies
        are missing assorted pages.. *sigh* a5 years, gad - they jus' don'
        make them paperbacks like they usta'.

a5 == 25.. Damn.. I'm goin' to bed.

Can't you just cut and paste them?  :-)

        Sadly, no - in the years of moves and reading, they lost sets of
        pages thru the same areas *sigh*..

Bummer!  You're just too consistent!  :-)

Yah, and Dune - those particular volumes in particular - copped me an A+
in a college lit-class on a paper I wrote ;-)

(Did you write the paper in the Queen's English or pfv-online style?  ;-)

I wrote in in the scholarly-bable with huge words an empty-meaning
typical to university papers.. And got an A+.

  And you're happy about that?

  If I submitted a paper in "scholarly bable [sic] with huge words
  an [sic] empty meaning" and got an A+, I'd be pretty concerned about
  the quality of the education I was getting.  

        You should.. I'll just remember not to write it ala' Telnet.

(This looks like a good place for the text from Item 115, but I'll let the
author copy his words, should he be so inclined. ;)

The Heinlein Archives have been put online.

http://www.heinleinarchives.net/upload/

You can purchase anything ever published, plus notes, etc.  

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss