Robert Heinlein

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by st_swithin
J. Michael Stracynski is still better than all of 'em put together (he's the guy who originally created "Babylon 5").

I'm not sure. He writes Amazing Spider-Man now and he preaches a helluva lot. Really turns me off. You should have read the tripe of the "9/11 reflection" issue.

[MikeH]

He's not a facist, he's a writer who writes about how society could be in different visions of the future. It's the whole point of science fiction.

He seems to mostly try to subvert traditional moral values which is especially interesting considering when he was writing. I think he's got a lot to say that's very relevant today about how to be open minded. Stranger in a Strange land is probably one of the most important books I've read from a personal point of view. I really liked Time Enough for Love a huge amount as well. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress was good, as was Starship Troopers but Stranger in a Strange land is brilliant and so damn subversive. I love it.

[TCO]

Maybe I should reread it. I personally like his adventure style books. The juveniles, Double Star, Puppet Masters, Door into Summer. You know...the 50's crap.

I think he did play with an idea occasionally. Don't know if he really advocates the various scheme in Stranger or Troopers or Moon. But that is not to say, he didn't have a worldview. I think it shows in his juveniles. Go Navy! Beat Army!

[TCO]

I personally found that the latter stories became too much of a game where the hero had no constraints. Everything from that brain transfer one on...except for Friday. In Friday, there was more dramatic tension. It was less of a galivanting around and more of a real person caught in a bad situation. A little less like a god having fun and more like a real person fighting, learning, living. I can care about that.

[Rex Little]

Originally posted by TCO
I personally found that the latter stories became too much of a game where the hero had no constraints. Everything from that brain transfer one on...except for Friday. In Friday, there was more dramatic tension. It was less of a galivanting around and more of a real person caught in a bad situation. A little less like a god having fun and more like a real person fighting, learning, living. I can care about that.

You nailed the problem with Heinlein's later work. The Number of the Beast-- in particular was completely deuces wild, no limits on what could happen. Friday was indeed the only book after that which read like vintage Heinlein--and vintage Heinlein is the best science fiction ever written.

Regarding the notion that Heinlein was a fascist, Spider Robinson (an excellent SF writer himself and a huge fan of Heinlein) wrote the following:

"This is the most popular Heinlein shibboleth in fandom, particularly among the young--and, of course, exclusively among the ignorant. I seldom bother to reply, but in this instance I am being paid. Dear sir or madam: kindly go to the library, look up the dictionary definition of fascism. For good measure, read the history of fascism, asking the librarian to help you with any big words. Then read the works of Robert Heinlein, which you plainly have not done yet. If out of 42 books you can produce one shred of evidence that Heinlein--or any of his protagonists--is a fascist, I'll eat my copy of Heinlein in Dimension."

[-Jrabbit]

Heinlein has good writing skills.

But he's politically one-dimensional, certainly misogynist, and, for long stretches, was doggedly formulaic.

I prefer Samuel Delaney for sheer unbounded creativity, Roger Zelazny for pure fun, Philip K. Dlck for altenative reality, and Robert Forward for "real science" sci-fi.

Asimov is very admirable, always had great concepts, very well thought-out, but never grabbed me with his actual writing.