[net.sf-lovers] Heinlein's ideologies

FIRTH%TARTAN@CMU-CS-C.ARPA (02/05/84)

Most of us seem to agree that some Heinlein books are a lot worse than
other Heinlein books.  My own list of bad ones includes Starship Troopers,
Farnham's Freehold, and Time Enough for Love.  For that matter, my list
of good ones includes The Door into Summer, Stranger in a Strange Land,
and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

But to what extent does this follow from any of Heinlein's several
ideologies?  It's not true that a book is bad merely because a specific
ideology is the basis for the plot and much of the action, for then
TMIAHM would be a lot worse than Glory Road, rather than a lot better.
Nor, I think, do I just like the books whose ideology I agree with.
Part of the problem may be that sometimes the ideology gets in the way of
proper construction, characterisation &c.

However, I think it's wrong to speak of Heinlein's "ideology" - I get more
than on ideology out of the books, and its not clear to me which if any the
author believes or lives by.  Perhaps the most consistent motif is the
concept of the "competent person" (and Friday is not the only Heinlein
competent female - consider Anne in SIASL).  That seems more the antithesis
to "ideology", which is typically the refuge of incompetents.

Robert Firth

PS Hands off Richard Wagner.  I know he was a socialist, and wanted by the
   Bavarian police for several years, but in those days socialism was neither
   totally corrupt nor utterly indefensible.  And what have you done as good
   as Parsifal?
-------

lmc@denelcor.UUCP (Lyle McElhaney) (02/07/84)

Indeed, who has done as well as Heinlein's "Double Star"?
-- 
		Lyle McElhaney
		(hao,brl-bmd,nbires,csu-cs,scgvaxd)!denelcor!lmc