For Us, The Living, by Robert A. Heinlein

Sethb writes "For Us, The Living, Robert A. Heinlein's first novel, written in 1938, is not a lost masterpiece. It is, however, a fascinating piece of writing for the Heinlein fan to ingest. It's not a book you should give to a friend to introduce them to Heinlein, in fact, it works best as what it is, the last piece of Heinlein's work to be published, and it should almost certainly be one of the last pieces someone starting to read Heinlein should attempt." Read on for Sethb's review. M : CBC also has a feature about the book.

For Us, The LIving
author	Robert A. Heinlein
pages	288 pages
publisher	Scribner
rating	3
reviewer	Seth Bokelman
ISBN	074325998X
summary	Great piece for die-hard Heinlein fans, not for newbies.

The book starts with an excellent foreword from Spider Robinson, a friend of Heinlein's as well as a fan, and an excellent Sci-Fi writer in his own right. Spider lays it all out for you in the foreword: this book isn't strong on stories, it's strong on ideas. People who found Heinlein's later works too preachy should steer clear, as this book is probably his preachiest. Robinson speculates that Heinlein really wanted to convey his radical ideas, having just lost a political race, and spent too much of the book standing on the proverbial soapbox, and not enough telling a good story. He says that Heinlein learned from this, and went on to become a master storyteller, learning that people are much more likely to sit still for the lecture if it's embedded in a gripping story.

And that leads me to exactly what's wrong with For Us, The Living. There's very little story in it. There is a plot, and it goes like this. Perry, our hero, (n reality a thinly veiled version of Heinlein himself), is involved in a car accident in 1939, and wakes up in the year 2086 in the body of someone who looks very much like himself, but the original inhabitant of the body chose to end his life (shades of Stranger in a Strange Land here). Our Hero was discovered in the snowy Nevada mountains by a woman named Diana, who is a professional dancer and lives in the mountains. She takes him back to her place to recover, and they're lounging around her house naked by the second page of the book.

From then on, the rest of the book is primarily spent following our hero as he is lectured (literally at times) on the ways of the future, covering topics such as polygamy/polyamory, nudism, the stupidity of jealousy, economics, religion, and the treatment of criminals as patients who need to be cured, rather than miscreants who need to be punished. Many of the ideas that turn up later in Heinlein's books, especially his later books, appear here for the first time. The book is very much, as Spider calls it in the foreword, Heinlein's literary DNA. This is the primordial ooze from which the later books, (Time Enough For Love, Stranger in a Strange Land, Starship Troopers, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and dozens more) are formed.

I found Heinlein's predictions of the future very interesting. Since the book was written in 1938-1939, the world hadn't witnessed World War II yet, though Heinlein predicts it. In his version, the U.S. stays out of the War, and Europe eventually self-destructs. Heinlein gets quite a bit of the future right, and quite a bit of it wrong. For instance, in 2086, they still haven't landed a man on the moon, though they're working on it. And, while in the future everyone has terminals (seen in later Heinlein novels) from which they can access live video and audio, information is still printed on paper and transported physically via pneumatic (and magnetic) tubes. But, given that it was written before the atomic age, those things are forgiven, and they're part of what makes the book interesting to read.

It's very obvious why this book wasn't published in 1939 -- it's not very good. Also, much of the subject matter is so controversial and sexual to this day that no major publisher would have dared print it then. The book is a bit rough, and a bit "off" in places. For instance, Heinlein uses a two-page footnote(!) to give us Diana's life story, rather than weave it into the story or the dialogue, something he'd never do in his later work, and the story only starts to get compelling in the last 50 pages or so, once the bulk of the lectures are past us.

So do I recommend this book? Yes and no. If you're a Heinlein fan, and you've read most, if not all, of his other work, then you'll love this book, and you should get a copy right now. It's a great snapshot of Heinlein's writing while he was still struggling to define it himself. If you've never read a Heinlein book, don't start here, pick up Starship Troopers, or Have Spacesuit, Will Travel. If you've read a few Heinlein books, read a few more before you try this one, especially Time Enough For Love, and his later works. I've read everything he ever published, and was sad when I finished off The Menace From Earth, as I'd run out of Heinlein to read. This book provided me with one more thrill, and it made me appreciate how strongly Heinlein held his convictions, and how far he came as a writer, from this, his first attempt.

Now that Bob & Ginny Heinlein have passed on, however, this is almost certainly the last significant piece of Heinlein's writing left unpublished, and for us, the living, it's fun to have something new from the Grand Master to curl up with on a cold winter night.

---

You can purchase For Us, The Living from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to submit a review for consideration, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

He is one SF author I reallly miss.

[AltGrendel]

I've always liked his style. I admit that his main caracters were all essentally the same core personality, but I can truly say that I seriously enjoyed most all of his writing. This will be something I will get no matter what.

Ouch

[gowen]

Heinlein's *preachiest* book?

Thats right there on my TODO list with:
i) Jim Carrey's wackiest movie,
ii) Todd Rundgren's most experimental synthesiser sounds,
iii) Elvis Presley's most sugary ballads
and
iV) JRR Tolkein's most esoteric back-of-an-envelope scribbling, lovingly -- and profitably -- edited by his hack son.

Re:Ouch

[Valdrax]

iV) JRR Tolkein's most esoteric back-of-an-envelope scribbling, lovingly -- and profitably -- edited by his hack son.

Ooo! Ooo! How about Frank Herbert's most esoteric back-of-an-envelope scribbling, lovingly -- and profitably -- edited by his hack son? [penny-arcade.com]

Re:Ouch

[soft_guy]

V) Darl McBride's most meritless lawsuits
VI) Stupidest ???->Profit! jokes
VII) Most obnoxious slashdot sigs

The lesson here

[b-baggins]

Is to make totally sure you've destroyed EVERY copy of a manuscript you never want to see the light of day, because after you're dead, some self-serving snot will publish it for the world to see and who cares about your wishes in the matter.

Raging paranoia necessary

[Dogtanian]

Is to make totally sure you've destroyed EVERY copy of a manuscript you never want to see the light of day, because after you're dead, some self-serving snot will publish it for the world to see and who cares about your wishes in the matter.

Hey, we're already at the stage where Douglas Adams had an unfinished book recovered from his hard drive and published.

If you want to be safe, use a word processor on a computer that never connects to a network (could recover data on the network), restrict your copies to removable disk to those you would be happy being published or are able to destroy, and at some stage physically destroy the hard drive beyond any possible recovery.

In fact, do the same to *any* part of the computer that might (even temporarily) have held your data, including the monitor.

Paranoid? Well, I'm trying to second-guess information recovery in 20-30 years time, and I defy anyone to say that this will never happen.

Of course, the radiation from your monitor probably induced microscopic interference in the TV signal your VCR is recording nearby, and with advanced signal-processing and pattern-recognition, your great lost tome is recovered from an episode of Dawson's Creek you taped back in 2003.

Yuk.

Re:The lesson here

[PinkStainlessTail]

If not for one of those snots [pitt.edu] we wouldn't have much Kafka to read. Sometimes going against an author's wishes is the right thing to do. Sometimes.

Re:The lesson here

[amplt1337]

The lesson here is, if you want your manuscript never to see the light of day, don't become a really good author.

Tens of thousands are already using this method, with great success!

Wills

[ucblockhead]

I believe that it is Harlan Ellison that wrote into his will that all unfinished manuscripts be destroyed upon his death.

Wrong lesson

[fm6]

That lesson only applies if the author is willing to admit that anything he's written doesn't deserve to be read. A lot of Heinlein's less readable work might have been salvaged with a little rewriting, but he tended to fall in love with his first version, and resisted any changes to it. In 1973, he gave a speech at the U.S. Naval Academy (his alma mater), in which he totally denounced rewriting. If I recall correctly, he asked something like, "Would you throw out a chair, just because it didn't come out perfect?" Of course, most writers would answer, "Well, yeah, if it's ugly, splintery, and tends to fall over."

It's interesting to note how the quality of Heinlein's work declined starting in the late 60s. First his plots started to get a little disorganized, then a lot disorganized, until finally most of his books were little more than meandering rants. He was still basically a good writer, but he slipped into a lot of bad habits. I think he always basically an undisciplined writer, but when he was a struggling pulp writer, he had to accept correction from his editors. Once he became The Grand Old Man, he could escape that, and the result was often horrendous. Like early editions of Time Enough for Love, which weren't even checked for proper punctuation!

The Annapolis speech also mentions the only class he considered to have taught him anything about writing. It wasn't an English or Lit class. It was a command in giving orders, the motto of which was "Any order that can be misunderstood, will be misunderstood." Student of the origins of Murphy's Law take note!

Re:The lesson here

[dvdeug]

You're dead. Furthermore, you died a great author author that someone actually published the book you had sitting in your closet half done. If you want to spin in your grave over it, that's fine, but you'll really be remembered for two or three works, and that won't be one of them.

In any case, again, you're dead. Really, who cares about your wishes in the matter? Why should they?

Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[jIyajbe]

The first novel of Heinlein's I read was "Time Enough for Love", and it made a huge impression on the teenager I was. I loved it.

Then I read "Stranger in A Strange Land", and I thought it was very similar in important respects, but I still liked it.

I went on to read several more of his books and short stories, and eventually I came to feel that he simply took the same central ideas, wrapped them in a thin veneer of different characters, and re-published them as a "new" book.

MAN, did I quickly grow tired of him!

(It did NOT help that I think his politics suck.)

Asimov is the Grand Master, not Heinlein. (In my opinion.)

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[CodeWanker]

I read my first Heinlein book (Red Planet) when I was 8, and I've read and re-read most if not all of his writing a LOT since then (I'm 34 now and still grab a bit of Heinlein now and then.)

IMHO, everything he wrote before Stranger in a Strange Land is awesome science fiction... And everything there and since is pretty Frakking awful. Except Friday. And now, not only do we have the Friday exception, we have the For Us, The Living exception.

From what I can tell from reading, For Us, The Living as a titl

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

My first Heinlein book: "Space Cadet", age 9. My favourite: "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress".

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[sTalking_Goat]

In my experience this seems to happen a lot, especially with teenage boys. My first Heinlein was Starship Troopers and I still thinks its was of the best books ever written. But the more you read of Heinlein, especially his later stuff like I will Fear no Evil the more you begin to either really hate or really love him, becuase he really does go all Ayn Rand at the end there.

But in a way thats good I suppose. If people either love you or hate you then you must really be saying something.

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[nobody69]

On the rec.art.sf.written discussion group, some claimed, and was pretty univerally agreeed with (a true rarity), that every RAH novel was on some huge fan's favorite list AND on some huge fan's most-hated list. My fav - _Friday_, unless it's _Harsh Mistress_, my least favorite - _Number of the Beast_. Spung indeed.

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[kimgh]

I pretty much like Heinlein's works, in spite of the admitted deficiencies mentioned here. But I Will Fear No Evil has got to be one of the most execrable pieces of writing I've ever had the misfortune to read. That's sad, because I remember being so excited when I first saw the book in a bookstore in Boise; I thought up till then that Heinlein was done writing, and I'd already read everything he was going to produce.

I've read IWFNE three times. The first time, I thought it was disappointing. Years later,

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[gaijin99]

Asimov is the Grand Master, not Heinlein. (In my opinion.)

Really? I never could stand Asimov's fiction. He's just about the best *science* writer our species has ever produced, but his fiction bored me to tears. Matter of taste...

I went on to read several more of his books and short stories, and eventually I came to feel that he simply took the same central ideas, wrapped them in a thin veneer of different characters, and re-published them as a "new" book.

MAN, did I quickly grow tired of him!

(It did N

It's no solution

[Perianwyr Stormcrow]

<i>Probably the single stupidist vision of how things should work ever proposed.</i>

It's the do-nothing vision of how things should work. No planning, not even any recognition of a problem. In other words, pretty much the perfect human solution to such a problem.

I strongly suspect that's about how it's going to work out, too.

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[j_w_d]

Personally, I prefer Heinlein's work. For Asimov his mystery I Robot is a great story. Personally the Foundation series bored me neyond tears. Heinlein in contrast always told craftsman like stories, though you might like or dislike his take on things. The problem of course was assuming you knew what that might be. The best test of understanding is to try and imagine the mind that could write BOTH Stranger in a Strange Land and Starship Troopers simultaneously, which HeinLein did. I have always thought his best story was The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress. Job is also a pretty sharp commentary, though you may begin to think it repeats views of earlier books.

Now, considering Starship Troopers, you really, really need a better pair of reading glasses, since you seem to have confused it with some other work. The "problem" in Starship Troopers is political. How does a society decide who is sufficiently responsible to particpate in the political process. The answer Heinlein offered was not one he necessarily advocated. Heinlein appears to say that only those willing to serve society in some capacity, e.g. soldier, mailman, government scientist, experiment-test subject should be allowed to vote. Corporate big-wigs like Rico's father sneer at wasting time in politics and prefer to ignore the process until the bombs start falling.

When I say "appears" that is precisely the slight of hand Heinlein uses. He is not exposing you to his own opinion. During one of the courses Rico has to take, the question is raised as to how the characters in the story know this "present" state is politically right. The answer Heinlein's instructor advances is that they don't know it's right, just that it works well enough for society to function. The implication is that societies work as long as a majority of its citizens are satisfied with the status quo, and if the individual members find it intolerable then they need to work change it. It is actually a fair insight into how any society works and why it's members are often reluctant to change. About the only unequivocal assertion Heinlein makes in the book is that war is always founded in economics, even putative religious wars. Job or Stranger may have been closer to Heinlein's ideals than Starship Troopers was.

The sciences that Heinlein really tackles in his fiction are anthropology and sociology and [grimace] political "science." A good and explicit example of this is his novel "Citizen of the Galaxy," which has been trivialized by critics fairly often. Heinlein uses technological fiction as a backbone to expose the central character to different societies and values. Among other things one of the central character's discoveries is that you shouldn't mistake the fact that any society can contain worthwhile people with the idea that the society itself is worthwhile. This is both implicit and explicitly dealt with in the book through the experience and characters the central character is exposed to.

Probably one of his most chilling and creepily accurate predictions is in the novel Between Planets. If you doubt that he predicted someting like this, reread it and then consider the course the present administration is taking regarding Homeland "Security" and particularly the so-called Patriot Act. The weakening of civil and individual rights is there. The excuse of security is there. The implication that the "need" for stronger security may be due to the arrogance and intolerance of the "Federal" government is lurking there as well. Even the suggestion that far from learning from our own history, we are engaged in repeating it is there. These ideas also lurk in Stranger in a Strange Land as well.

Heinlein is writer on a par with Kipling. Both have been accused of an enormous amount of political incorrectness. Yet their work contradicts every attempt at some simple minded generalization about them, and even contains examples where they examine issues and even show clear sympathy for views and ideas their critics accuse t

Re:Heinlein Published Just One Novel

[drakaan]

I got familiar with Asimov first, and I still love to read his robot stories. I read all of the foundation series, but didn't enjoy them as much until many years later (guess age makes a difference).

Heinlein wasn't introduced to me until I was in my mid-20's, and I think the first book of his that I read was Stranger in a Strange Land...after which, I read every one of his books I could lay my hands on.

Harry Harrison, Piers Anthony (Bio of a Space Tyrant was a pretty decent sci-fi series), and others gav

Re:Asimov the Ink Generator

[EvilTwinSkippy]

My only complaint with Asimov is character development. Granted, some would argue that is the POINT, but each of his characters never seems to change course from where they started. It's greek tradgedy with robots.

This is from a devoted fan, mind you. IA has a permanent place in my private stash of books for that desert Island experience. But there will also be a bit of Dickens and Joyce to round it out.

Realism

[sssmashy]

Perry, our hero, (in reality a thinly veiled version of Heinlein himself), is involved in a car accident in 1939, and wakes up in the year 2086 in the body of someone who looks very much like himself, but the original inhabitant of the body chose to end his life (shades of Stranger in a Strange Land here). Our Hero was discovered in the snowy Nevada mountains by a woman named Diana, who is a professional dancer and lives in the mountains. She takes him back to her place to recover, and they're lounging around her house naked by the second page of the book.

Well, come on. The poor guy hasn't had an erection in 147 years. I'm surprised he waited until the second page to start getting it on.

Re:Realism

[Jeremy Erwin]

At least he didn't wake up inside the body of Diana.

Re:Realism

[Alrescha]

"At least he didn't wake up inside the body of Diana."

That's a different book.
(see "I Will Fear No Evil")

A.

Thanks, but...

[meta-monkey]

Thanks for the review...I'll probably check it out, as I've read about 85% of Heinlein's work. However, you recommend people start with "Have Spacesuit, Will Travel?" I'm sorry, that was not one of his better works. It was actually rather...lame. The characters were weak, the story was extremely thin. Invaders from space? You don't say. Try "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress." That was far and away one of the finest books I have ever read.

Re:Thanks, but...

[RealProgrammer]

First book for new Heinlein reader? I read most, or all, of Heinlein's books and short stories by my early twenties. Yeah, I read other stuff, too. Here's my list of Heinlein's novels to read:

1. Methuselah's Children

   I think this is the prototypical Heinlein book. It starts with a basic premise about something that's different from reality, and explores the consequences of it.

2. Starship Troopers

   Not as juvenile as the movie, this book will challenge a young adult and their beliefs about citizenship, the military, and life. I think it had a profound influence on my decision to join the Marine Corps and to stick it out.

3. Stranger in s Strange Land

   The word "grok". 'Nuff said. (This was my first Heinlein book)

4. The Door Into Summmer

   This book is premised on an inventor who creates the first domestic robot, something like a Roomba but a little smarter. The times we're living in now remind me of this book.

5. Any other Heinlein book

6. The Number of the Beast

   It was the work in progress when he died, and it's not what his other work was. It did give me the line, "Did the universe just shift again?"

Re:Thanks, but...

[DaveAtFraud]

6. The Number of the Beast

It was the work in progress when he died, and it's not what his other work was. It did give me the line, "Did the universe just shift again?"

Err, ummm, no. The Number of the Beast was published quite a few years before RAH died. I read it in the mid-80s and it wasn't new then. The last two books by Heinlein were Job: A Comedy of Justice and The Cat Who walked Through Walls (in that order IIRC). You're probably thinking of "Job" since it involved the universe shifting with

About what I expected

[Unknown Kadath]

I was thinking this would either be a cruder version of his earlier work, or a polemic. The fact that he hung on to it suggests it was important to him, so I'd suspected it involved his prevailing themes (sexual freedom, personal responsibility, etc.)

Heinlein hated the direction he foresaw the world taking, and it came out more and more in his later works, when he could write pretty much anything and his publisher would print it. I confess to liking Number of the Beast, but lord Bob almighty, it certainly can't compare to Stranger or The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. I'm glad Heinlein took the time to refine his craft.

That said, I'm kinda looking forward to reading what sounds like a Mary Sue story that neither he nor Ginny would ever have let see the light of day during their lives.

-Carolyn

I want to be a paperback writer

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

Goddamn Heinlein,

Give it up! Yer supposed to be dead for chrissakes! STOP WRITING!!!

Give us unknown nobodies a chance huh?

Thanks.

Re:I want to be a paperback writer

[daeley]

Somehow, I think there's somebody else [lronhubbard.org] you should be yelling at more than him. :) What was it, an entire decology post mortem?

Part of a series

[CommieLib]

The second, following We, the Living [amazon.com]. It will be followed by Stephen King's We, the Dead. Then the series continues with Jerry Garcia's unpublished autobiography, For Us, the Dead. Finally it will be concluded with a Michael Crichton book, We, the terminally ill, but feeling better today. Perhaps there's still hope for a transplant.

Monty Python

[FunWithHeadlines]

"The second, following We, the Living. It will be followed by Stephen King's We, the Dead. Then the series continues with Jerry Garcia's unpublished autobiography, For Us, the Dead. Finally it will be concluded with a Michael Crichton book, We, the terminally ill, but feeling better today. Perhaps there's still hope for a transplant."

You forgot to conclude it with the Monty Python book, We, the Not Quite Dead Yet.

Belay that

[pvera]

I believe the last Heinlein you should read is "I will fear no evil." I almost did not read "Stranger in a Strange Land" because I had the misfortune to read "I will fear no evil" first.

Agreed

[lordpixel]

I love Heinlein, but when I picked up "I will fear no evil" last year.

I'd rather read the Number of the Beast 6 times back-to-back! Or maybe 6x6x6 times ;) At least Beast one has the root of some of the ideas in Time Enough For Love and Friday in it.

Re:Belay that

[Valdrax]

Personally, I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't subject yourself to that book at all.

Re:Belay that

[steveha]

I think you should start with Heinlein's best works, and if you keep reading, finish with his worst ones. So the last ones you read, in order, are I Will Fear No Evil, then To Sail Beyond the Sunset, then "The Number of the Beast". No doubt For Us, the Living goes in there somewhere.

I would recommend starting with Citizen of the Galaxy, Double Star, or The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. I loved all those.

steveha

Re:Belay that

[Catbeller]

Keep in mind that I Will Fear No Evil was written during the time that Heinlein became seriously ill for a time. The book was a first draft, printed while he was convalescing. Heinlein never had a chance to go through the book and edit out the chaff; and the publisher was disinclined to edit the Master too harshly.

Postmortem publication

[Animats]

Remember those L. Ron Hubbard billboards? "Ten Bestsellers - and More to Come!" that appeared after he was dead? Scientology put those up during that weird period when it wasn't clear whether Hubbard was dead or not.

Decent Review

[Jack9]

This sounds exactly like the kind of book I would like to buy.

Short stories, too!

[vcohen]

In addition to the geat novels others have mentioned here, be sure to check out All You Zombies, a (short!) short story that's one of the tightest time-travel tales you'll ever read. Originally published in 1959, you can find it in The Fantasies of Robert A Heinlein, a short-story collection. There's also a full copy online somewhere, posted by an English prof. for his class but accessible to anyone.

Re:Short stories, too!

[red floyd]

It's also in the same collection as "The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag", and "And He Built a Crooked House". I believe the collection shares a title with the Hoag story.

Re:Short stories, too!

[Gryftir]

The book, The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag has "They" which is probably my favorite Heinlein short. It's incredibly tight, almost Lovecraftian, work that seems to be based around the idea that you are not really paranoid if they really are coming to get you. Probably the best exploration of paranoia in Sci Fi ever. Gryftir "Slashdot? is that some sort of internet thing?"

i don't see it

[mboedick]

I really don't understand why so many people are crazy about Heinlein.

I have read Heinlein and found his work embarrassingly corny and dated. Contrast with Philip K. Dick, whose ideas seem uncannily (and frighteningly) relevant to our own time.

Re:i don't see it

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Dude, if Philip K. Dick is relevant to your own time you need to stop dropping Acid. I love his work, but there is more to life than Paranoia.

And yes, I have read his stuff. I love his stuff. But I don't sit up at night wondering if I'm real or the world around me is.

I know that I'm a process running in a giant multiuser system with multiple layers of virtualization. Where I draw the line is in believing that knowing this somehow causes $#%@#$^@!%!#$%!@^H%BV No Carrier

Re:i don't see it

[Elwood P Dowd]

They're all corny and dated. Arguably Asimov or Bradbury kindof stand the test of time without become quite as dated.

Gibson seems to understand that about his own work. Each book is a time capsule not from the future, but for the future. If you want to remember what our collective unconscious was like in 1988, read Mona Lisa Overdrive.

Pattern Recognition is very dated - it is set around the first half of 2002, and reflects a sentiment that is gone from our world already.

I think Heinlein's stuff should ha

"expanded" Stranger in a Strange Land

[peter303]

His widow published the original SISL manuscript which was about 30% longer than the 1960s version. There is a section at the beginning about MArtian society which is interesting. Unfortantely the blowhard character Jubal has longer speeches too.

Orphans of the Sky

[ishmalius]

This is my favorite Heinlein book... and talk about imitated!

How many times did Star Trek have an episode about a culture who forgot its ancestors, or its raison d'etre? This is one of the most common story lines today in SF.

Re:Orphans of the Sky

[EvilTwinSkippy]

The Most Common Story Lines in Science Fiction:

1. Boy meets girl, boy looses girl, boy makes new girl.
2. Man builds artificial creature, creature wants man's job.
3. Man discovers kink in reality, Godhood ensues.
4. Culture becomes so advanced it forgets how to move forward.
5. Man creates life form, life form does all the work. Bored man wants job back.
6. Detective has strange case that is solved when by uncovering a new technology.
7. Some guy on SlashDot blurts out the meaning of life the Universe and Everything. Is mod

Nice Review! :) and *SPOLER*

[sakeneko]

I just finished For Us, The Living last night, and I agreed with most of what this reviewer said.

He did miss one glaringly obvious fact about this book, though, to anyone familiar with Utopian literature -- it's essentially a retelling of Edward Bellamy's Looking Backward [gutenberg.net] . Bellamy was looking backward from 2000 to 1887, and Heinlein from 2086 to 1939, of course. In addition, Heinlein's idea of how a perfect world would look differs considerably from Bellamy's. But the similarities between the two are

Oh, really?

[steveha]

Perry, our hero, (n reality a thinly veiled version of Heinlein himself)

I'm wondering why book reviewers feel confident in statements like this. How can you be so sure that Perry is a "thinly veiled version of Heinlein himself"? And even if it's true, what makes it such a crime? Are you implying that Heinlein was being lazy or something?

steveha

Re:Oh, really?

[steveha]

every single major character in every single novel the guy ever published is just a thinly veiled version of the author

Johnny Rico? Jubal Harsaw?
Valentine Michael Smith?
Friday? Mr. Kiku?
Waldo? The Great Lorenzo?
Thorby? Joe-Jim?
The Unmarried Mother?
Podkayne, and her obnoxious brother?

These were all thinly veiled versions of Heinlein?

Nope, not buying it.

P.S. I think what's going on here is that Heinlein was always story-driven, much more than character-driven. Some people like that, some people don't. Unless the story happens to be about character development, characters in a story-driven story don't get as much attention.

But to leap from that to saying that every character is RAH himself in disguise is, IMHO, less than insightful.

steveha

Heinlein for the beginning geek

[doom]

If you haven't read any Heinlein, try reading the quote juevnilles unquote that he wrote for Scribners. Red Planet, The Rolling Stones (no relation), Space Cadet, and so on are all great books. Most of the excesses (political and stylistic) that Heinlein-haters like to complain about are soft-peddled on these.

A personal favorite of mine is Have Spacesuit Will Travel, which is a mix of some gritty hard SF (e.g. survival situation on the moon involving solving problems with incompatible valve fittings) and crazed space opera (an amorphous alien blob named "The Mother Thing", representing the authority of the unified Three Galaxes).

The three books by Heinlein that may ultimately be the most interesting (and also the most controversial) are:

• The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - Lunar colonists rebel against an oppressive earth government, in alliance with an accidentally developed AI.
• Stranger in a Strange Land - A boy raised by Martians is brought back to earth, where he displays some tremendous parapsychological powers, and more importantly an odd philosphical outlook.
• Starship Troopers - Space wars of the future (some interesting speculative hardware is featured) fought by an earth government ruled by a strange form of democracy where only military veterans [1] are allowed to vote. Some grim philosphy is presented about the inevitability of war.

Note: Mistress is beloved by libertarians; Stranger was worshipped by sixties hippies (it's literally a cult novel) and Troopers is beloved by conservatives. Be careful about making rash generalizations about what Heinlien was "really" about.

[1] Yes, I said "*military* veterans". Yes, I know what Heinlein said in "Expanded Universe". Try reading this (warning PDF): The Nature of "Federal Service" in Robert A. Heinlein's Starship Troopers [nitrosyncretic.com]

Re:Who?

[cK-Gunslinger]

Are there still people who haven't heard of Google [google.com]? Or Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]?

Re:Who?

[tds67]

Would somebody care to explain who Henlein is...

1. Heinlein invented a maneuver that can save a person from choking.

...and why his book is on the front-page of slashdot.org?

2. There is no new SCO news today.

Re:Who?

[BTWR]

2. There is no new SCO news today.

Yeah, and also no "Nintendo is dying / Spam Sucks" stories either :)

Re:Who?

[mr_mischief]

Probably one of the best writers of science fiction.

Ever heard of Red Plant or Starship Troopers? Stranger in a Strange Land?

He won Hugo awards in 1956, 1959, 1961, and 1966. He's had other works nominated for the award. He was published for over 50 years.

He also has written quite a bit of nonfiction.

Re:Who?

[orthogonal]

Probably one of the best writers of science fiction.

And inventor of the water-bed.

Re:Who?

[ksoltys]

Robert Heinlein was probably the most influential science fiction writer of the 20th century, possibly the most influential American writer of the 20th century. He didn't create modern science fiction single-handedly, but he dominated the field from his first short story in 1940. It's impossible to estimate how many scientific and engineering careers were launched by his juvenile novels of the 1950s, but the number must be huge.

Go to www.heinleinsociety.org to find out more.

Re:Who?

[kalidasa]

possibly the most influential American writer of the 20th century.

No. The most influential American writer of the 20th century was probably ole Ez (Ezra Pound), another socred believer, and a treasonous bastard, who nevertheless dramatically affected the literature of the US and Europe from 1914 on, influencing Yeats, Eliot, Joyce, Frost, Williams, cummings, and pretty much every writer listed in your common literature anthologies after 1925. Next most influential American? Maybe Pynchon. You may not realize the influence they had on the way you understand books, but they did have a significant influence.

Heinlein was a great pulp SF writer, but his influence on SF, or literature and culture in general, was only slightly greater than Asimov's or Clarke's. Given the "harder" science of Clarke's work, I'd argue that he had more influence on the future scientists and engineers of the world than Heinlein. Rand had more influence on politics (to our undying regret), and Hubbard, well, his influence for the worse is pretty easy to see, isn't it? The person who really dominated SF in the 40s and 50s was John W. Campbell, the editor of Astounding/Analog who developed Asimov, Heinlein, de Camp, van Vogt, and many other famoust SF writers.

The most influential 20th c. SF *writer* might be Capek, who's important for more than just R.U.R. - he was an important figure in pre-WWII Czech (and European) cultural politics. I'd argue that the best SF writers who've gone were Herbert and Dick, with Heinlein and Asimov not that far behind, and that the best who are still around are Lem and Vinge. Heinlein is fun, and has a lot to say, but he has two major weaknesses: he's self-indulgent and repetitive.

Re:Who?

[sielwolf]

Mmmm. I'd probably consider Hemmingway before Pynchon. E.H. is uniformly cited on both shores of the Pond and his modernism can be traced to most postmodern work. Basically the entire Minimalist genre (Didion, early Brett Easton Ellis, etc.) is just a slight pomo retinkering of his ideas. Probably less of a logical leap than Pynchon's work but more fundamental.

In terms of SF... I'd have to go with PKD just because his work has now escaped the genre. The similarities between Martin Amis' Time's Arrow a

Re:Who?

[frank_adrian314159]

And a lot of True SF Geeks who evangelize repeatedly about Do Androids Dream? and Man in the High Castle are probably bored to tears by something like Valis or Divine Invasion.

Probably true.

Myself, I found Valis stunning. I always remember Valis' answer about the cat.

Re:Who?

[nobody69]

Re: RAH's influence. I think it's pretty significant that during coverage of the moon landings, RAH was the 'color commentator' for CBS (iirc). Not Asimov, who wrote more (a _lot_ more) nonfiction science pieces than RAH. Also, RAH conciously worked at getting his short fiction into the Saturday Evening Post and the like, not just sf mags. Outside of the US, Clarke is probably a bigger influence on engineers, though. And you're right about Campbell's influence, Heinlein, Asimov and Clarke were the writers, but Campbell bought and published their work and to aome extent also directed the course. Obviously, he influence was greater on newer writers.

Also, Vinge does rock.

Re:Who?

[gobbo]

The most influential 20th c. SF *writer* might be Capek,

Perhaps, but let me suggest an alternative: Olaf Stapledon. Poorly known, and not a good novelist, but he writes the history of humanity for some 8 billion years in Last and First Men: A Story of the Near and Far Future and the history of the entire freakin' cosmos in Star Maker -- pub. in 1930 and 37, respectively. So what you say? Well, despite the lack of characterization or compelling storytelling, he was a master of grandly sketched plot ideas,

Re:Who?

[StefanJ]

Robert A. Heinlein. Very prolific and influential SF author, active from the 40s through the 80s. One of the grand old men of the genre.

I read great heaps of RAH in high school and my early college years. One of my "first loves" in SF. I'm less of a fan now, and see a lot of his stuff as dated and politically cranky . . . but his best stuff holds up well.

Have Spacesuit, Will Travel was already mentioned. A great YA novel.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. Libertarian moon colony vs. heavy-handed Earth authorities.

Time for the Stars. Under-appreciated YA novel about telepathic twins used to communicate with starships.

Waldo. Actually a novella. Genius-nerd with atrophied muscles, not satisfied with bedrest, builds . . . waldos.

Starship Troopers is a wonderful, obnoxious polemic.

Stefan

Re:Who?

[Short Circuit]

Wasn't Heinlen the person who originally gave the waldo its name?

Rah, rah, RAH!

[LittleGuy]

Add in Podkayne of Mars [amazon.com], a YA novel with a young girl feminist(!) Mars native. The ending is somewhat controversial, and a contest for an alternative ending was held.

The Menace from Earth

[mec]

I wanna see the Wachowski brothers make "The Menace From Earth".

No, I don't wanna see Jeff in a trenchcoat and Holly in black PVC. I wanna see Ariel falling in bullet time with Holly chasing her. And I want the soundtrack to be QUIET while they are doing it.

Re:The Menace from Earth

[red floyd]

That would be cool, wouldn't it?

Re:Who?

[mr_ekim]

Robert Heinlein was a science fiction writer, possibly very well known recently because his book, "Starship Troopers" was made into a movie several years ago (although most people already knew about him anyways, especially ones who were literate). I'm sure you heard of that movie, unless you have been living in the caves of Afganistan recently. His book is on the front page of slashdot because he writes science fiction and I heard this rumor that nerds like science fiction. Using my incredible deductive s

Re:Who?

[kalidasa]

Please tell me you're trolling.

Taking the hook: Robert Heinlein was a science fiction writer who wrote a large number of books, most famously Starship Troopers and Stranger in a Strange Land. He was a libertarian who infused his books with political and social theory. His "Future History" stories 1939-1950 ("If This Goes On", "Methuselah's Children," "The Man Who Sold The Moon," etc.) trace the development of American and world culture from the aftermath of the "Crazy Years" (basically the sixties on steroids) through the early interplanetary age to a short-lived totalitarian theocracy and into a an age of world government, near-immortality, and interstellar flight.

The other famous novels (not really in the Future History series) are The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Job.

Heinlein had a good reputation as a guy who tried to help out struggling SF writers (one example: PKD) in trouble.

His book is on the front page of slashdot because SF is one of the core elements of what slashdot considers to be nerdism.

By the way, on social credit: one major proponent of social credit was the poet Ezra Pound, who ended up following that line of thought unfortunately into support for the Mussolini regime, treasonous radio broadcasts during WWII, and a long stay in St. Elizabeth's mental hospital outside DC to avoid a conviction on treason charges. Not the direction Heinlein went in, obviously, but an interesting comparandum.

Grok

[gruntled]

If you're familiar with the word "grok" -- used to indicated grasp something completely, on every level -- you know Heinlein's work. The word is from Stranger In a Strange Land, arguably his greatest book, and a work that helped define science fiction for several generations. Heinlein's stories are classics; one of my personal favorites -- blanking on the title at the moment -- was about a society in which all citizens are required by law to carry guns. Duels are common, and everybody is incredibly polite :-). (I disagree with that objective, but I found the concept well-executed. As it were). Heinlein often exhibted a kind of crypto-fascist ideology on a certain level (read the book Starship Troopers and you'll get more out the humor within the movie), but it's not clear whether he actually believed it or was just being provocative. Sadly, much of his output after Stranger -- which came out in the early sixties -- was largely derivative of his earlier works.

Re:Grok

[Gilmoure]

one of my personal favorites -- blanking on the title at the moment -- was about a society in which all citizens are required by law to carry guns. Duels are common, and everybody is incredibly polite :-).

Sound's like H. Beam Piper's Planet for Texans. Indiscriminante killing is outlawed but shooting politicians is ok. Piper was a lot like Heinlein in his political outlook but rather more prudish in his social mores.

Re:Who?

[Frymaster]

actually, heinlein, while imo a mediocre author did give the english language a valuable gift: the word grok [reference.com]

grok:
1. To understand, usually in a global sense. Connotes intimate and exhaustive knowledge.
2. Used of programs, may connote merely sufficient understanding. "Almost all C compilers grok the "void" type these days."

Re:Who?

[Gilmoure]

Thought that was Sturgeon. Am I wrong?

You call yourself geeks?!!! Sheesh...

[Thud457]

Actually, Heinlein & Hubbard were talking, and Heinlein said that the starting a religion was a sure way to get rich.

Hubbard went out and did it.

"We, the Living?"

[Thud457]

What year did Ayn Rand publish "We, the Living"? This title sounds awfully similar.

And we all know that Heinlien was notorious as a raving libertarian looney. Hell, he's practically slashdot's patron saint.

Re:"We, the Living?"

[Pii]

Wait...

Are you saying he's Slashdot's patron Saint because of his Libertarianism, or because of his prolific Sci-Fi work?

I ask, because I'm libertarian, and I think Slashdot is littered with Liberals/Socialists.

Re:Who?

[B'Trey]

I don't know that I'd classify him as "the best" but he was certainly one of the best and a pioneer in many, many ways.

Any collection of information, whether a magazine, a web site or an anthology, is almost always "stuff that interests the editor(s)." What would you recommend, that the editors in charge of selecting content go out searching for stuff that bores them to tears?

Re:Who?

[twiddlingbits]

Some modern day sci-fi authors are at least as good as RAH (and even as radical). Greg Bear, David Brin, Larry Niven, C.J. Cheryh come to mind. Others who are not golden age but not modern, but were great writers would be Ursula LeGuin, Harlan Ellison, Fredick Pohl, and Robinson. As far as sci-fi goes it really all started with Jules Verne, then the golden age authors of the 30's-50's took it to another level.

Re:Who?

[Erik_Kahl]

When you're reading a Heinlein book and there is a scene where one of the characters drops a name and you GET the reference to a different Heinlein story...you're no longer starting to read Heinlein. At that point you're prepared for his best, worst and strangest works.

Heinlein is not for everyone. He was an intelligent, strong and opinionated writer. His characters reflect this with an "I'm doing it my way and unless you plan to TRY kill me thats the way its going to be." kind of attitude. Often people are intimidated or offended by that attitude. I'm a huge fan of it. While I don't agree with all of Heinlein's views, I have imense respect for the fact that he took the time to develop an opinion and effort to express it as he did.

Re:Who?

[Alrescha]

"Heinlein is not for everyone. He was an intelligent, strong and opinionated writer."

Well said. I note that many of the posters here favor Heinlien's young adult stories. His later works require more patience and sophistication on the part of the reader.

I think the first story I read was "Tunnel In The Sky" when I was ten. I read Stranger when I was 14 and I walked around for days in a sort of post-electric-shock sort of way.

A.

Re:Who?

[Pii]

The other poster asked anonymously, but I'll put my name on the question...

What seems to be the problem?

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

[Pii]

...or rather, your complete misunderstanding of free markets.

As the anonymous poster said, it is regulation that permits a monopoly to be created, not the absense of regulation.

Let's look at the ever popular hypothetical "widget" market:

There are a number of widget manufacturers out there, each minding it's own business, building and selling widgets to the masses, because widgets are a vital useful product.

WidgetCo, refines their process, and strikes deals with the providers of the raw materials in

Re:Contradiction

[palironsat]

Nope, this one's legit. This one was just recently discovered, according to this [heinleinsociety.org] article. While I admit that it's kind of cool that they found something like this and could publish it, I'm not sure of how good an idea it is - it was obviously unpublished for a reason. And according to a couple of reviews (particularly the one that this article mentions), that might be for the best... Of course, I'm still buying it. I have to round out my collection somehow.

Re:Contradiction

[DaveAtFraud]

I enjoy describing the book as, "Heinlein's first novel which is also his last novel but there were several others published in between and this one was published after he died."

There are no contradictions. If you think something is contradictory, examine your premises (or on /. RTFA).

Re:So, basically...

[Short Circuit]

In Time enough for love, Lazarus Long goes to great lengths to teach his children the dangers of incest. To the point of inbreeded many generations of guinea pigs and photographing the deformed and stillborn pups.

In To Sail Beyond the Sunset, Maureen works hard to keep two of her children from being involved with each other. The book may be considered as an epic from the lessons Maureen learns as a parent along the way.

you are a stupid person

[Ender Ryan]

No, Heinlein was not "into" incest. In his work, he illustrates WHY incest is a Bad Thing(TM). No, it is not because it is *perverted; it is purely because of genetics. Before it was understood that incest caused nasty things to happen in offspring, there weren't social mores against such things.

Indeed, Heinlein makes many good predictions about future social behavior.

You are simply trapped into the social constructs of your time, like most are.

Re:Predicted WWII?

[JASegler]

Although I haven't read the book the comment was straight forward to understand.

Heinlein predicted the war. However, he predicted the US stayed out of it and Europe self-destructed.

In actuallity the US WOULD have stayed out if not for Pearl Harbor. Because of Pearl Harbor, we did get involved and deviated from Heinlein's prediction.

So in answer to your question, he predicted the war, but got the outcome wrong. Although I don't think you had to be psychic to predict a war occuring in the late 1930's.

-

Re:Slightly off topic....

[Valdrax]

Start with "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," "Starship Troopers," and then "The Puppet Masters." (Try to cleanse your mind of any movie adaptation you might have seen of the last two.

Then go back aways to his earlier books: "Revolt in 2100," "Waldo & Magic, Inc.," and "The Man Who Sold the Moon," and for an introduction to his long-lived repeat protagonist Lazarus Long read "Methuselah's Children." Then check out his juvenile works, "Have Spacesuit -- Will Travel," "The Star Beast," and "Podkayne of Mars," are all good, simple fun from the days of wide-eyed adventure SF.

Then, stop at anything past "Glory Road" (1963) with only two exceptions -- the aforementioned "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" and "Job: A Comedy of Justice," which is very different from most of his works. Starting with "Farnham's Freehold," the quality of Heinlein's writing starts to decline, in my opinion. Preachiness and an obsession with polyamory starts to just take over. Many of Heinlein's later books feature the character Lazarus Long, who is an interesting guy trapped in a terrible plot for all of the books after his first.

Avoid the following overhyped Heinlein books: "Stranger in a Strange Land," "Time Enough For Love," and "Friday." (The first two have some redeeming merits, but "Friday" is just dull.) Also avoid the following deservedly not overhyped Heinlein books: "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls" and "Number of the Beast." Both have very weak plots, and the latter is a nigh-impenetrable mishmash of all his previous books timelines.

Do not let the last part of Heinlein's career deter you from reading the earlier parts. He is definitively part of the Golden Age of SF for a reason.

stuff to avoid.

[sTalking_Goat]

like the parent said Starship Troopers and the Moon is a Harsh Mistress should be the first two, in any order you like.

Stuff I recommend you avoid unless you find out you really like Hienlein is "The Cat who walks through walls" "Time enough for Love" and defintely "I will fear no Evil". Frankly I think all his Lazurus Long books except 'Moon' are trash.

"A Door into Summer" is a favourite of mine, and Its not one of the ones people talk about much. I wouldn't say 'Friday' is dull, its just mostly fluff.

Ch

You take that back!

[Pii]

Blasphemer!

I liked the movie, but only after convincing myself that it was in fact an original work, rather than an adaptation of the similarly titled Heinlein masterpeice.

Re:Slightly off topic....

[Valdrax]

Yeah, the movie dispensed with the awful baggage of character development, credible aliens, and viable military tactics. It also added the much needed Verhoeven sex and gore touch -- in every way a superior work of fiction.

Re:Slightly off topic....

[Overzeetop]

I listened to the unabr. version of ST on CD, and my expectation was that it was the basis for the movie. Now I'd only seen the last 30-40 minutes of the movie, as chopped up by TNT or somebody, but I figured it would be a no-thought-required listening.

Oh boy, was I wrong. It's down right meaty. The future view from the last century adds a quaint touch here and there, but it's really a book about civilization and human organization. The political commentary shines though the (good) storyline. Being a Wa

Re:Slightly off topic....

[Tony]

"The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" is one of my two favorite books of all time. The other is "Gateway," by Frederick Pohl. Definitely start with "TMIAHM," which will give you a very good overview of all of Heinein's strange beliefs, and have you agreeing with most of them. (If only human nature were so pure.)

I'd agree with the assessment that everything from "Farnhham's Freehold" and later is generally oversexed and underplotted rehashes of his old ideas. I'd recommend "Stranger in a Strange Land," not so

Re:Slightly off topic....

[annielaurie]

FWIW, I don't think your question is all that off topic. There are several ways to go because he was such an amazingly prolific writer:

He wrote quite a series of "books for young people" (Tunnel in the Sky, Podkayne of Mars, Farmer in the Sky). All have the classic "brash young dreamer rebelling against his olde pharte parents" theme. Worth reading because they are just plain fun.

"Starship Troopers," considered by some to be his defining work. A lot of his political and personal ideas are expressed here,

Re:At least he did not start his own religion!!!!

[gobbo]

...religion and politics they get into sometimes I can live without. Just stick to writting guy's [sic], that is what you do best.

Awright! let's see... point me to some great work without religion or politics involved. Or, maybe you're saying that if you agree with the worldview etc. of the writer, it isn't religion or politics, but fact.

Even if the commentary isn't overt or intentional, any fictional writing (note the spelling please) is imbued with religion, politics, and everything in between. In fact

Re:At least he did not start his own religion!!!!

[gonzo67]

The Church of All Worlds is based off "Stranger in a Strange Land". And while they are a small group, they are fun folks to be around! But you are right in that he did not create a religion for his own ends, but others simply took his ideas and ran with them.

Be equally afraid of...

[mykepredko]

those that base their religion/philosophies on Science Fiction books.

Probably the biggest recent purported example of this is Osama Bin Laden's fascination with Asimov's "Foundation" trilogy. When it was translated to arabic, it was titled "Al-Qaida".

For reference, take a look at All Your Base... [demon.co.uk] or War of the worlds [guardian.co.uk]. The original story was in the Ottawa Citizen (I couldn't find a link to the article).

Scary stuff when a 50 year old Sci-Fi novel could be considered as the base for a terrorist philosophy

Re:Grand Master?

[EvilTwinSkippy]

One of the things that's been frustrating me as a writer is trying to avoid emulating the "Golden Age" sci fi style.

It just doesn't sell anymore, and everyone's first reaction is: This is just a copy of [Fill In the Blank]. What people forget is that the Golden Age writers copied the style of Jules Verne, Thomas Hardy, and Robert Louis Stevenson.

Granted the "Olden Age" sci fi writers didn't have a whole lot of sex going on in their books. Damn Victorians. But you can take that template back almost a cen