From archive (archive) Subject: The Cat Who Walks Thru Walls (One opinion) From: chrise@ihlpl.UUCP Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: 22 Jul 86 21:38:47 GMT I don't normally write reviews...and the content of this posting isn't really intended to be one...but it might be construed as such. This is in specific response to someone who posted a request a couple of weeks ago for advice appropriate for making a decision as to whether to buy TCWWTW in hardcover. Dissenting opinions are welcome. So if you don't want to read this brief "gripe" (not a spoiler), now is the time to get out..... The Cat Who Walks Through Walls I love Heinlien. I think he is my favorite SF author. I don't buy books in hardcover so my wife knows that when gift time comes around she is always safe buying the latest HRH book if it isn't available in softcover yet. I also like cats (we have three) so I sat down and polished off TCWWTW immediately. I was very disappointed. It doesn't meet the promise of the title until very late in the book. The premise is very weak. The plot line is a rehash of "lets bounce around the Universes a little more" that we have seen so often in other LL genera books. It was short and I found it only moderately entertaining. In my view it was a formula book written to make a buck with no redeeming SciFi (sic) value. Don't get me wrong, it wasn't a bad book, but I would never use it as a model for HRH's style and talents. I have since reread the book thinking it was my state of mind at the time which colored my opinions. It wasn't. I still didn't find it to be the all engrossing, mentally stimulating work that other HRH work has been. Chris Edmonds @ AT&T Something-or-Other, Naperville, IL ...!ihnp4!ihlpl!chrise That's my opinion, I'm sure some people loved it! From archive (archive) Subject: GRUMBLES FROM THE GRAVE by Robert A. Heinlein From: ecl@cbnewsj.ATT.COM (Evelyn C. Leeper) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: 6 Mar 90 00:29:26 GMT GRUMBLES FROM THE GRAVE by Robert A. Heinlein Del Rey, 1989, ISBN 0-345-36246-2, $19.95. A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper This collection of letters and letter excerpts was apparently planned by Heinlein before his death as a way to provide some income to his widow. (Of course, the royalties his books continue to collect help as well.) The letters cover a wide range of topics, concentrating mostly on his writing style, but also covering cats, houses, politics, fans, penguins, and just about everything else. There are a few cases in which names have been omitted, on the advice of his lawyers, and many of the letters are excerpted rather than included in full. Now, everyone else has oohed and aahed over this book, and I don't mean to rain on their parade, but as someone who did *not* grow up reading Heinlein, I just can't get that excited about this book. (My childhood was spent reading John W. Campbell's THE MOON IS HELL and "Black Star" series, which probably explains why I've ended up the way I have, but that was what my library had.) My personal opinion (which you are free to ignore, of course) is that Heinlein wrote some great short stories and some okay novels--and some really bad novels as well. Given that, I don't view this book as the Apocrypha of a great body of work, an appellation more suited to L. Ron Hubbard than to Heinlein anyway (though with STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND one might make the religious connection for Heinlein as well). It is of interest, but no more or less so to me than a similar book of another's author's letters would be. I found the parts dealing with his writing more interesting than the parts discussing the building of his house, for example. On the other hand, I would go into ecstasy over a book of Olaf Stapledon's letters, so let that tell you something about my tastes. In any case, as they say, your mileage may vary. Evelyn C. Leeper | +1 201-957-2070 | att!mtgzy!ecl or ecl@mtgzy.att.com From rec.arts.sf-lovers Mon Jan 21 10:16:28 1991 Path: herkules.sssab.se!isy!liuida!sunic!uupsi!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!mipl3!pdb059 From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew) Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf-lovers Subject: Uncut *Stranger In a Strange Land* (long) Message-ID: <89551@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov> Date: 17 Jan 91 10:44:05 GMT Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab Lines: 267 There has been some speculation in this newsgroup as to just what changes are present in the new edition of Heinlein's *Stranger In a Strange Land*. According to the preface by Virginia Heinlein, the first published edition contained approximately 160,000 words. The newly published edition contains approximately 220,000 words. After reading the new edition, I have to say that I didn't notice any dramatic changes between the two editions. There are no major new sections or characters or motivations; no dramatic new explanations or revelations. The only changes I noticed were, 1) some additional biographical data for Mrs. Douglas, 2) a change in the ending of Ben's first visit to the Nest (specifically, why he ran out the way he did), and 3) some changes to Mike's and Jill's first meeting with Patricia Paiwonski. It seems to me that most of the extra wordage comes from additional qualifiers, extra sentences scattered here and there throughout the text. As evidence for this, I've included the text from the first chapter of each edition so that you can compare for yourself and see exactly what I mean. The text from the older edition contains 633 words, the text from the newer edition contains 977 words, yet there really doesn't seem to be any substantive difference between them. In fact, you could argue that the text of the original publication benefitted from the editing--it seems tighter and cleaner than the wordier uncut release. The bottom line is that if you didn't like it before, you still won't like it. If you did, you still will. I'd recommend buying it only if you're a Heinlein completist. Okay, here is the first chapter of *Stranger In a Strange Land*, as published in my Berkley Medallion paperback edition, published in March, 1968. These excerpts are printed without permission. All typos and errors are mine. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Once upon a time there was a Martian named Valentine Michael Smith. The first human expedition to Mars was selected on the theory that the greatest danger to man was man himself. At that time, eight Terran years after the founding of the first human colony on Luna, an interplanetary trip made by humans had to be made in free-fall orbits--from Terra to Mars, two hundred-fifty-eight Terran days, the same for return, plus four hundred fifty-five days waiting at Mars while the planets crawled back into positions for the return orbit. Only by refueling at a space station could the Envoy make the trip. Once at Mars she might return--if she did not crash, if water could be found to fill her reaction tanks, if a thousand things did not go wrong. Eight humans, crowded together for almost three Terran years, had better get along much better than humans usually did. An all-male crew was vetoed as unhealthy and unstable. Four married couples was considered optimum, if necessary specialties could be found in such combination. The University of Edinburgh, prime contractor, sub-contracted crew selection to the Institute for Social Studies. After discarding volunteers useless through age, health, mentality, training, or temperament, the Institute had nine thousand likely candidates. The skills needed were astrogator, medical doctor, cook, machinist, ship's commander, semantician, chemical engineer, electronics engineer, physicist, geologist, biochemist, biologist, atomics engineer, photographer, hydroponicist, rocketry engineer. There were hundreds of combinations of eight volunteers possessing these skills; there turned up three such combinations of married couples- -but in all three cases the psycho-dynamicists who evaluated factors for compatibility threw up their hands in horror. The prime contractor suggested lowering the compatibility figure-of- merit; the Institute offered to return its one dollar fee. The machines continued to review data changing through deaths, withdrawals, new volunteers. Captain Michael Brant, M.S., Cmdr. D. F. Reserve, pilot and veteran at thirty of the Moon run, had an inside track at the Institute, someone who looked up for him names of single female volunteers who might (with him) complete a crew, then paired his name with these to run problems through the machines to determine whether a combination would be acceptable. This resulted in his jetting to Australia and proposing marriage to Doctor Winifred Coburn, a spinster nine years his senior. Lights blinked, cards popped out, a crew had been found: Captain Michael Brant, commanding--pilot, astrogator, relief cook, relief photographer, rocketry engineer; Dr. Winifred Coburn Brant, forty-one, semantician, practical nurse, stores officer, historian; Mr. Francis X. Seeney, twenty-eight, executive officer, second pilot, astrogator, astrophysicist, photographer; Dr. Olga Kovalic Seeney, twenty-nine, cook, biochemist, hydroponi- cist; Dr. Ward Smith, forty-five, physician and surgeon, biologist; Dr. Mary Jane Lyle Smith, twenty-six, atomics engineer, electronics and power technician; Mr. Sergei Rimsky, thirty-five, electronics engineer, chemical engineer, practical machinist and instrumentation man, cryologist; Mrs. Eleanora Alvarez Rimsky, thirty-two, geologist and selenolo- gist, hydroponicist. The crew had all needed skills, some having been acquired by intensive coaching during the weeks before blast-off. More important, they were mutually compatible. The Envoy departed. During the first weeks her reports were picked up by private listeners. As signals became fainter, they were relayed by Earth's radio satellites. The crew seemed healthy and happy. Ringworm was the worst that Dr. Smith had to cope with-- the crew adapted to free fall, and anti-nausea drugs were not needed after the first week. If Captain Brant had disciplinary problems, he did not report them. The Envoy achieved a parking orbit inside the orbit of Phobos and spent two weeks in photographic survey. Then Captain Brant radioed: "We will land at 1200 tomorrow GST just south of Lacus Soli." No further message was received. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Now here is the first chapter of *Stranger In a Strange Land*, as published in the new Ace/Putnam hardback edition. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Once upon a time when the world was young there was a Martian named Smith. Valentine Michael Smith was as real as taxes but he was a race of one. The first human expedition from Terra to Mars was selected on the theory that the greatest danger to man in space was man himself. At that time, only eight Terran years after the founding of the first human colony on Luna, any interplanetary trip made by humans necessarily had to be made in weary free-fall orbits, doubly tangent semi-ellipses--from Terra to Mars, two hundred-fifty-eight days, the same for the return journey, plus four hundred fifty-five days waiting at Mars while the two planets crawled slowly back into relative positions which would permit shaping the doubly-tangent orbit--a total of almost three Earth years. Besides its wearing length, the trip was very chancy. Only by refueling at a space station, then tacking back almost into Earth's atmosphere, could this primitive flying coffin, the Envoy, make the trip at all. Once at Mars she might be able to return--if she did not crash in landing, if water could be found on Mars to fill her reaction-mass tanks, if some sort of food could be found on Mars, if a thousand other things did not go wrong. But the physical danger was judged to be less important than the psychological stresses. Eight humans, crowded together like monkeys for almost three Terran years, had better get along much better than humans usually did. An all-male crew had been vetoed as unhealthy and socially unstable from lessons learned earlier. A ship's company of four married couples had been decided on as optimum, if the necessary specialties could be found in such a combination. The University of Edinburgh, prime contractor, sub-contracted crew selection to the Institute for Social Studies. After discarding the chaff of volunteers useless through age, health, mentality, training, or temperament, the Institute still had over nine thousand candidates to work from, each sound in mind and body and having at least one of the necessary special skills. It was expected that the Institute would report several acceptable four- couple crews. No such crew was found. The major skills needed were astrogator, medical doctor, cook, machinist, ship's commander, semantician, chemical engineer, electronics engineer, physicist, geologist, biochemist, biologist, atomics engineer, photographer, hydroponi- cist, rocketry engineer. Each crew member would have to possess more than one skill, or be able to acquire extra skills in time. There were hundreds of possible combinations of eight people possessing these skills; there turned up three combinations of four married couples possessing them, plus health and intelligence--but in all three cases the group-dynamicists who evaluated the temperament factors for compatibility threw up their hands in horror. The prime contractor suggested lowering the compatibility figure- of-merit; the Institute stiffly offered to return its one dollar fee. In the meantime a computer programmer whose name was not recorded had the machines hunt for three-couple rump crews. She found several dozen compatible combinations, each of which defined by its own characteristics the couple needed to complete it. In the meantime, the machines continued to review the data changing through deaths, withdrawals, new volunteers, etc. Captain Michael Brant, M.S., Cmdr. D. F. Reserve, pilot (unlimited license), and veteran at thirty of the Moon run, seems to have had an inside track at the Institute, someone who was willing to look up for him the names of single female volunteers who might (with him) complete a crew, and then pair his name with these to run trial problems through the machines to determine whether a possible combination would be acceptable. This would account for his action in jetting to Australia and proposing marriage to Doctor Winifred Coburn, a horse-faced spinster semantician nine years his senior. The Carlsbad Archives pictured her with an expression of quiet good humor but otherwise lacking in attractiveness. Or Brant may have acted without inside information, solely through that trait of intuitive audacity necessary to command an explora- tion. In any case lights blinked, punched cards popped out, and a crew for the Envoy had been found: Captain Michael Brant, commanding--pilot, astrogator, relief cook, relief photographer, rocketry engineer; Dr. Winifred Coburn Brant, forty-one, semantician, practical nurse, stores officer, historian; Mr. Francis X. Seeney, twenty-eight, executive officer, second pilot, astrogator, astrophysicist, photographer; Dr. Olga Kovalic Seeney, twenty-nine, cook, biochemist, hydroponi- cist; Dr. Ward Smith, forty-five, physician and surgeon, biologist; Dr. Mary Jane Lyle Smith, twenty-six, atomics engineer, electronics and power technician; Mr. Sergei Rimsky, thirty-five, electronics engineer, chemical engineer, practical machinist and instrumentation man, cryologist; Mrs. Eleanora Alvarez Rimsky, thirty-two, geologist and selenolo- gist, hydroponicist. The crew had a well-rounded group of skills, although in some cases their secondary skills had been acquired by intensive coaching during the last weeks before blast-off. More important, they were mutually compatible in their temperaments. Too compatible, perhaps. The Envoy departed on schedule with no mishaps. During the early part of the voyage her daily reports were picked up with ease by private listeners. As she drew away and signals became fainter, they were picked up and rebroadcast by Earth's radio satellites. The crew seemed to be both healthy and happy. An epidemic of ringworm was the worst that Dr. Smith had to cope with--the crew adapted to free fall quickly and no anti-nausea drugs were used after the first week. If Captain Brant had any disciplinary problems, he did not choose to report them to Earth. The Envoy achieved a parking orbit inside the orbit of Phobos and spent two weeks in photographic survey. Then Captain Brant radioed: "We will attempt landing at 1200 tomorrow GST just south of Lacus Soli." No further message was ever received. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Bartholomew | "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of | many things..." Lewis Carroll pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov | Disclaimer: Opinions? What opinions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From rec.arts.sf-reviews Sat Jul 27 03:16:24 1991 Path: herkules.sssab.se!isy!liuida!sunic!news.funet.fi!fuug!mcsun!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!ig!pws.bull.com From: wex@pws.bull.com (Alan Wexelblat) Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf-reviews Subject: Review of Robert A. Heinlein's THE PUPPET MASTERS Message-ID: Date: 25 Jul 91 00:48:28 GMT Sender: mcb@presto.ig.com Lines: 50 Approved: mcb@presto.ig.com (SF-REVIEWS acting moderator) THE PUPPET MASTERS by Robert Heinlein review Copyright (c) 1991 Alan Wexelblat Like many SF readers, I grew up on Heinlein (along with Tolkein, Bradbury, Clarke, and Asimov). Since giving up on his books years ago, I've heard enough disparaging words about the man to make me wonder if his stuff was really as good as I remember. This reissue settled it for me. "Puppet Masters" was the Heinlein restoration I waited most eagerly for. I remember when I first read the original that I felt something missing. The story felt incomplete. So now I have the (and I quote) "entire, uncut novel." It is everything I remember, and yes, it makes more sense with the restored text. The plot (assuming there's still one person on the planet who hasn't read the book yet) concerns the invasion of Earth by parasitic aliens, the Masters of the title. Humans are the puppets; enslaved by Masters, humans will cheerfully kill their best friends or starve themselves to death with blissful smiles on their faces. The hero is Sam Cavanaugh, one of the top agents in a new super-spy network run by the US government (like a competent CIA). Secondary roles are played by Mary, a female agent, and the Old Man who runs the agency. The three of them are pivotal in the discovery of and fight against the invaders. So why do I like this book despite it's pulpish, simplistic plot, ordinary characters and a fairly poor attempt to predict technology after 1951 (when it was written)? First, remember that Heinlein was a master story- teller before anything else. Even when I knew what would happen next, Heinlein's writing encouraged me to keep reading. Further, I found his attempt to project out from the immediate-post-WWII world he lived in to be an honest attempt to break societal straightjackets. His treatment of Mary is awkward - he wants her to have spirit, drive and a life of her own - but he doesn't have any role models to draw on. But Mary is as (or more) feminist than many of the cardboard women I read in today's SF novels. Heinlein anticipates the problems of dual-tracking that women who want both career and family face today. In summary, "Puppet Masters" is a darn good book. It's not great literature (it's not even great SF), but I won't have any problems letting my kids read it. In fact, the only problem may be getting them to put the book down long enough to eat dinner. And, yes, RAH was as good as I remembered. %A Robert Heinlein %T Puppet Masters %D May 1990 (original copyright 1951) %G 0-345-33014-5 %I Del Rey SF From rec.arts.sf.written Tue Apr 27 02:33:46 1993 Xref: lysator.liu.se rec.arts.sf.written:10421 alt.books.reviews:373 Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,alt.books.reviews Path: lysator.liu.se!isy!liuida!sunic!pipex!uunet!haven.umd.edu!wam.umd.edu!cbaker From: cbaker@wam.umd.edu (C. Douglas Baker) Subject: __Take Back Your Government__ by Robert A. Heinlein Book Review Message-ID: <1993Apr26.034836.12866@wam.umd.edu> Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.written Sender: usenet@wam.umd.edu (USENET News system) Nntp-Posting-Host: rac1.wam.umd.edu Organization: University of Maryland, College Park Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1993 03:48:36 GMT Lines: 82 __Take Back Your Government: A Practical Handbook for The Private Citizen Who Wants Democracy to Work__ by Robert A. Heinlein Book Review by C. Douglas Baker Hardcore Heinlein fans will find _Take Back Your Government_ to be an engaging monologue on democracy and American government. __Take Back Your Government__, as the title suggests, is a polemic, albeit a light-hearted one, about the importance of participation in a democratic system of government. Heinlein often states that if people do not participate in democracy, then they cannot complain about the corruption and malfeasance of their government. He strongly asserts that people participating in politics does matter. Heinlein's key message is that democracy can only survive if citizens participate and take responsibility for their government. He conveys substantial anecdotal evidence where one ordinary person or groups of people, participating in politics, made a difference. Without citizen participation, government becomes atrophied both morally and effectually. Although written in 1947 and a bit out-of-date, one of the basic premises of the book, that local government matters and is the place to start if you are interested in politics, still holds true today. The book is filled with Heinlein's witticisms and conjectures about the democratic political process. One can find little fault with the facts and opinions Heinlein expresses vis a vis local politics at mid-century. Those familiar with academic literature on urban machines, the reform movement, and local politics will find Heinlein's analysis both accurate and humorous. The only time I found Heinlein's analysis to be questionable was in his too optimistic outlook for the possibility and efficacy of starting a third political party in the United States. History and precedent suggest that third parties are greatly disadvantaged in the American system of government for reasons too numerous to examine here. Probably the most enjoyable chapter is the second to last entitled "Footnotes on Democracy". Therein, Heinlein maintains that if the United State's did not have any Communists "we would almost be forced to create some". He goes on to aver any social field or group in which Communists make real strides in gaining members or acceptance of their doctrines...is in bad shape from real and not imaginary social ills [and] the rest of us should take emergency, drastic action to investigate and correct the trouble. Unfortunately we are more prone to ignore the sick spot thus disclosed and content ourselves with calling out more cops (pages 223-224). Maybe Heinlein is not quite the authoritarian his detractors would have us believe. Heinlein also has some interesting insights on the role of lawyers in politics that ring true today. Specifically, he notes about the creation of laws: "[lawyers] assert that their special language is necessary, as ordinary speech is not sufficiently exact...[yet] lawyers are forever disputing as to what a law means after they have written it" (page 225). These are just a few examples of Heinlein's clever analysis of American politics. __Take Back Your Government__ was published, I assume, mainly for fans of Robert A. Heinlein. I doubt non-Heinlein fans would find the book particularly interesting. The book, from an academic standpoint, is pedestrian and dated. Therefore, the audience most likely to enjoy this book are those who have some interest in Heinlein's works. %T Take Back Your Government: A Practical Handbook for the Private Citizen Who Wants Democracy to Work %A Robert A. Heinlein %C New York %D 1992 %I Baen Books $5.99 (pbk) %G ISBN 0-671-72157-7 (paperback) %P 288 From rec.arts.sf.written Wed Jun 16 12:17:18 1993 Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written Path: lysator.liu.se!isy!liuida!sunic!pipex!uunet!world!jcf From: jcf@world.std.com (Joseph C Fineman) Subject: _Grumbles from the Grave_, by R. A. Heinlein Message-ID: Summary: Comments on a collection of R. A. Heinlein's letters Keywords: Heinlein, letters, honor Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1993 21:37:32 GMT Lines: 80 _Grumbles from the Grave_ by Robert A. Heinlein (Ballantine, 1989). Review written in 1989. This amusing book of excerpts from Heinlein's correspondence reveals the agony etc. that went into so many stories that brightened my youth. I find that I can remember reading 37 of the 89 short stories & novels listed in the bibliography, tho none published since _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ (1966). Heinlein's character seems to me to be just simple enough, & just enough like mine, for me to grasp. The major source of his morale was that he was able to regard himself as a grown man, in the sense of Kipling's "If": honorable, patient, and, of course, able to make a living: to stick to his station & its duties, to keep up his end of a bargain, to respect others' rights & duties and put up with their defects, to cultivate a sense of proportion & not whine. He became a writer by accident, because he was too sick to go on being a naval officer, and his satisfaction in his work was almost entirely subordinated to moral grounds for self-esteem. Like me, he did not regard Art as an autonomous category of human values, and was contemptuous of those who did; when he got (privately) exasperated over the abundant asininities of his editors, it was not because they subordinated Art to the pursuit of sales (that, he repeatedly acknowledged, was part of the deal): it was because they were too stupid & meddlesome to let him do a good job at what he was good at. In a credo that he wrote for a radio program he said: > I believe in the honest craft of workmen. Take a look around you. > There were never enough bosses to check up on all that work. From > Independence Hall to the Grand Coulee Dam, these things were built > level and square by craftsmen who were honest in their bones. (Rest in peace.) He tried to do right by his fans, and answered their mail for as long as it remained possible ("I get as tired of answering them as an old whore gets of climbing those stairs"), but he stayed away from conventions, clubs, and the like, which he referred to as "organized fandom" -- an echo, no doubt, of "organized religion", which was a common pejorative phrase among skeptics of his generation. I suspect that being taken seriously made him queasy. The above quotation is interesting in showing not only the major strain in his character (devotion to duty), but also a minor strain that saved him from being merely a stoic, and made it possible for him to be a sf writer: he believed in Man. This required, especially in his day, a certain conservatism & limitation of his imagination. A writer's customers are human beings of a kind, and most of them will not be interested in characters that do not seem human enough for them to identify with. The farther away in [the future or the cosmos] a story is set, the less plausibly can such characters be imagined. I noticed this problem at about 15, after reading _Cybernetics_ & _The Road to Wigan Pier_, and it made me intolerant of all sf that was placed more than a couple of hundred years in the future. But sf writers, until the last decade or so, were not allowed to notice it. Every story had to contain human beings. (James Blish's charming story "Surface Tension" is an exception that proves the rule: It was not enough to imagine intelligent rotifers; there had to be some hocus- pocus to get human beings mapped into them.) And indeed it is no problem for Heinlein: in the abovementioned credo he says that Man -- not just the evolutionary process taking off from him, but "this hairless embryo with the aching, oversize brain case and the opposable thumb" -- will _outlast the earth_. More, he was an optimist (in the vulgar sense of the term): one of those (in Mencken's phrase) born to hope. He believed in human progress. Like me, he had some of the crackpot tendencies that go with that temperament: He did not follow John W. Campbell all the way down to dianetics & Hieronymus machines, but he did take general semantics seriously far later into life than I did, and more generally he believed in the possibility of a science of human behavior that would have sound morals as a rigorous consequence. I note with amusement that the term "ego boo" was in use so long ago as 1968. -- Joe Fineman jcf@world.std.com 239 Clinton Road (617) 731-9190 Brookline, MA 02146 Path: news.ifm.liu.se!liuida!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!sunic!02-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu!usenet From: Kevin Lauderdale Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: STARSHIP TROOPERS by Robert A. Heinlein Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.written Date: 29 Sep 1996 16:15:48 -0400 Organization: Stanford University Lines: 81 Sender: wex@tinbergen.media.mit.edu (Graystreak) Approved: wex@media.mit.edu Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: tinbergen.media.mit.edu Keywords: author=Kevin Lauderdale X-Newsreader: (ding) Gnus v0.94 Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein Review Copyright 1996 Kevin Lauderdale It's hard to believe, but in my 28 years, I had never read STARSHIP TROOPERS. I've read a dozen of Heinlein's other novels, but never this one, considered to be a classic in the field. Upon reading that Paul Verhoeven (of ROBOCOP) is directing a film version, I thought I'd better read it now, before my view was colored. I'm glad I did, since the film is almost certain to stray widely from its source. STARSHIP TROOPERS is about just that, the Mobile Infantry -- the soldiers, the grunts -- of a spacefaring army in earth's future. We are at war with an alien species, "The Bugs," and these are the troops who fight on the front line. But this novel isn't a high-action military adventure. It's the first-person story of soldier Juan Rico, recounting his days from basic training through officer school to his first command. If there were absolute truth in titling, it might be called THE TRAINING OF A STARSHIP TROOPER. There are battles, but mostly this is a novel about what it's like to go through army training and how you spend your time as a soldie. Hint: most of it is spent studying and trying to catch a few more minutes of sleep. I am not a veteran. I was never even in ROTC. I have very little interest in matters military. Nonetheless, my opinion of STARSHIP TROOPERS is that it is, to use an over-used word, excellent. Remember when "excellent" referred not to pizza, but those items of art and literature which were exceptionally well-crafted? That's the "excellent" I mean. The book's cover declares it to be "controversial." Indeed it is, though not by the mealy standards to which we hold controversy today, i.e. sex and violence. 40 years ago, it was conflicting ideas and ideologies which caused controversy, not who was sleeping with whom. STARSHIP TROOPERS is a book which explores political and moral ideas. Why do we fight? How do you raise a child to be good and just, and then train a teen-ager to be killer? Who should be allowed to vote? These are real ideas. In a novel. This is not something you see everyday. Not that this book is dry or dull in any way. STARSHIP TROOPERS is vibrant. In the past, this book has been criticized for glamorizing the life of a soldier. I find that most peculiar, since this book does anything but that. One of the book's premises is that only veterans of "national service," basically, military service, are allowed to vote because they have proven that they have the best interests of the nation at heart and a stake in its integrity. Thus, the first half of the book is about our hero in basic training and the second half is about his time in OCS (Officer Candidate School). Nothing could be less glamorous than these schools of hard knocks; compare the film AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN to one which *does* glamorize the Navy, TOP GUN. Multi-mile marches over rough terrain and long periods of boredom punctuated by pain are what life in Heinlein's army is like. It's enough to turn anyone off the idea of military life for good. You see how hard, rigorous, taxing, and generally unpleasant basic training is. The actual fighting takes up only a handful of pages, and there we see how horrific battle truly is. There is a lot of death in the book, but mostly, this is a novel about the training one receives at various levels in the military and how that training gives you a stake in your nation's future. What Heinlein *does* do is make the army interesting to us civilians. Traditions and customs are explained. The reasoning behind the seemingly mindless way military life is structured is made clear(er). 99% of TROOPERS is about what a tough time Juan has learning the ropes and, by extension, learning responsibility. Essentially this is a book in which not much "happens." Yet, I couldn't wait to turn each page. I can see how, when this book was first published, at the dawn of the 1960's, it was criticized. There is set piece about raising children that rails against lack of discipline and the fact that children are not taught that there are consequences to one's actions. Heinlein's says that children must acquire a moral sense and responsibility to other people just as others are responsible to you. In the age of "doing your own thing," Heinlein was lucky he was only labeled by some a fascist. But from 1996, we can see how right he was. STARSHIP TROOPERS is not just an excercise in ideas, it is quite literally a morality tale. Now, more than ever, it should be required reading for everyone over the age of 12. Fortunately, it's one of the best reads you'll ever have. %D 1959 %G 0-441-78358-9 Kevin Lauderdale This and other reviews may be found at the Kevindex Web Page http://camis.Stanford.EDU/people/kxl/Webazine.html Available by e-mail: kxl@smi.stanford.edu (Subject: Subscribe Kevindex) Available free by post: Kevin Lauderdale, MSOB x-215, Stanford, CA 94305-5479, USA Path: news.ifm.liu.se!news.lth.se!feed2.news.luth.se!luth.se!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!europa.netcrusader.net!4.1.16.34!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!dreaderd!not-for-mail Sender: wex@deepspace.media.mit.edu Approved: wex@media.mit.edu Subject: Review: Podkayne of Mars by Robert A. Heinlein Organization: GNU's Not Unix! From: arenn@urbanophile.com Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.reviews Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.written Date: 06 Aug 2000 11:16:27 -0400 Message-ID: X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Lines: 70 NNTP-Posting-Host: deepspace.media.mit.edu X-Trace: dreaderd 965574988 9434 18.85.23.65 Xref: news.ifm.liu.se rec.arts.sf.reviews:2777 Podkayne of Mars by Robert A. Heinlein Review Copyright (c) 2000 Aaron M. Renn Conclusion: Marginal I guess it is a sort of crime against humanity to speak ill of Heinlein, but in the case of Podkayne of Mars, I can't resist. The old master has a few of the bad habits of far too many of his more modern cousins. In this case, I'd like to particularly point out his recycling of characters and themes from many of his other books, or maybe they were recycled from this one? We've got the worldly-wise old codger who's always ready to step in and take charge, the naive young protagonist along for the ride, the pseudo-strange culture extrapolated from a couple premises and described matter of factly by said young naive character who simply can't imagine that anyone lives differently. Podkayne is a nine year old Marswoman (18 earth years) who's making her first journey off-planet to visit Earth by way of Venus along with Jubal Harshaw, I mean her Uncle Tom and her mischievious brother Clark. Adventures ensue. This book is somewhat notable because the publisher forced Heinlein to change the ending. This edition contains both the published ending and Heinlein's original, along with essays from various readers commenting on why they liked one ending or another. Not surprisingly, the vast majority favored Heinlein's original ending, and that is what is presented here. In a culture that seems to worship the paramount importance of artistic vision - witness the proliferations of "Director's Cut"'s in film - and glories in artists triumphing over the evils of capitalistic management, it is not surprising to me that almost all of the essayists missed the obvious: both endings sucked. If I had to choose between Heinlein's original downbeat ending and the happier one he was forced to write, sure, one can draw the conclusion that the original was better. But is that really what the original ending should be compared against? I think it likely that Heinlein, an old codger himself, might have deliberately sabotaged the ending when forced to change the original. You want happy and moralistic? I'll give it to you all right. But when compared against what what could have been or should have been, I think the originally written ending falls short. What Podkayne ends up being is a morality play that is supposed to make the point that parents should be ready to take on the responsibility of parenting when they decide to have a child. This is by no means obvious from the originally written story and it is only because Heinlein bashes us over the head with it with a 2x4 in the modified ending that we can even figure this out. Indeed, both endings almost seem non sequiturs because what we are expecting - and what this novel should have been - is a coming of age story. Instead, it feels like the start of a coming of age story that is abruptly cut off after the main character shows disappointinly little personal growth. Had Heinlein seen that there was a good coming of age story in here trying to get out, he could have written a decent novel. Instead, he wrote a book that looks like he pulled the old, dusty start of something else out of his drawer and grafted on a moralistic ending. Or else woke up one morning halfway through his planned novel and realized it was due to the publisher by the end of the week. This was not one of Heinlein's stronger efforts. Too bad. %A Heinlein, Robert A. %T Podkayne of Mars %I Baen %D 1993-08 (original publication 1963) %G ISBN 0-671-87671-6 %P 282 pp. %O mass market paperback, US$5.99 Reviewed on 2000-07-30 -- Aaron M. Renn (arenn@urbanophile.com) http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/