So I'm reading "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress." Does it get any better before the end?

[Orrex]

I'm about 170 pages into it, and so far it's been mostly about nothing. Well, maybe it has political intrigue, but the political crap isn't intriguing. Just a lot of thinly-veiled minarchism. Worse, I find the writing to be extraordinarily dull. Reading five pages of this stuff is like reading 100 pages of coffee maker instructions, and Man's faux-Russianish narrative voice ain't helping it.


Does the book become worth reading at some point? I'm not asking for spoilers, unless the answer is "no."


Help!

[phantom power]

1. I read it so long ago...

My recollection is of enjoying it at the time, however I'm far from sure I would enjoy it as much now. I think that the giants of the "Golden Age" don't actually measure up that well against the talents of contemporary authors. They were the groundbreakers of their time, but the field has just progressed.

[TheWraith]

2. If you haven't started enjoying it by now, you probably won't.

The beginning is a little rough, but the style evens out a little after that and stays pretty similar throughout. Though I've got to say I disagree with you--I enjoy that book a lot.

[Orrex]

3. Am I missing something in it, then?

The most interesting thing (to me) is Mike's evolution as a sentient being. So far there have been about six total pages devoted to that story.

The least interesting thing (to me) is the government structure of Luna and the extensive ruminations about faux-libertarian minarchy. So far there have been about 180 pages devoted to that...


Even the revolution, toward which the book had nominally been building for 170 pages or so, took place in about a single paragraph and mostly off camera.

:wtf:

[SheilaT]

4. I'm old enough to have read it

when it first came out and recall enjoying it a great deal. I've read it several times since, but probably not in the last twenty-five years or so.

One huge problem with RAH is that he was really incredibly racist and sexist, but the racism and sexism tends to be hidden under the powerful right-wing libertarianism.

There is also a strong undercurrent of pedophilia in his later books, when adult or middle-aged men hook up with young teenage girls. It's VERY creepy and has been, so far as I can tell, totally ignored.

Two years ago I attended the Heinlein Centennial in Kansas City (he was born 07-07-07)and it was very disturbing to me that his right-wing rants were overlooked, that he was essentially deified. At one of the forums someone spoke up who had actually met Heinlein and his wife Ginny and commented that he was a right-wing nut case and she was even worse. The moderator simply went on, and did not acknowledge or respond to the remark. I later talked to the guy and told him that it was clear to me from reading Heinlein what he was really like.

Anyway, if the book still hasn't grabbed you after 170 pages, give it up. There are a lot of good books out there and your reading time is limited, even if you do nothing but read all of your waking hours.

[phantom power]

5. LOL! On the bright side...

his racism and sexism are mostly masked by his rabid libertarianism!

:rofl:

[Orsino]

6. Yes. There's good heartbreak ahead...

...and the revolution is handled believably, in context. If all the political theory hasn't worn you out yet, you're golden.

[YankeyMCC]

7. I love to re-read old favorites and RAH was definately one of my

fondly remembered early exposures to SF novels. I remember enjoying Hash Mistress but I haven't gone back so I can't really judge or reply to your analysis. Unfortunately you're probably closer to the mark than my memories. I still go back and enjoy Asimov and others but not RAH. I re-read Stranger last year and although I still consider it a classic and there's lots of good it fell well short of my sentimental memories. So I've stopped re-readhing RAH...because doing so is so thoroughly killing my memory of him as a favorite story teller.

[MrModerate]

8. It's vintage Heinlein. If that's not your spirit of choice, you're unlikely to change your mind.

What Heinlein fans like about this book (or at least *this* Heinlein fan likes) is the archetypal cranky, self-directed Heinlein-avatars navigating an interestingly dangerous social-political upheaval, finding love, adventure, friendship, and deeper values in themselves than they thought they possessed. The world he creates is -- more than most science fiction authors -- stage dressing for his characters to play in front of.

Lots of people hate didactic novels of this sort, but I grew up with Heinlein and I'm thoroughly indoctrinated.

[JitterbugPerfume]

9. I read it a long time ago

and I thought it sucked

[Orrex]

10. I just read a magnificent summary of the book on Salon

Hero worship is a common problem in "libertarian fiction". Robert Heinlein’s book The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress once gave many budding libertarians their first taste of "freedom philosophy". In theory, this "classic novel... of libertarian revolution" is suppose to be about how independent, square-jawed frontiersmen who have colonized the Moon escape for the corrupt control of a collectivist Earth.

In reality, the main lesson is that it’s easy to create a libertarian paradise if you're lead by a Jeffersonian genius, your best friend is an omnipotent super-computer named Mike and a sympathetic billionaire shows up halfway through the book to subvert Earth’s population. It also helps if you live on top of a 240,000 mile high cliff so you can drop rocks on the bad guy’s heads.

Maybe it’s just very difficult to write a compelling story about regular people enjoying day to day life. But Rand and Heinlein could have tried a lot harder.

from http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/12/6/811414/-A-Libertarian-Reads-Atlas-ShruggedPart-1

[TygrBright]

11. Well, that's it in a nutshell.

I have a love/hate relationship with RAH. Hate for the obvious reasons. (You want over-the-top libertarian polemic? Fused with militarist hero-worship? Try "Starship Troopers", the novel made into a movie so bad it's brilliant as a parody of itself, otherwise known as "Supermodels in Space.")

Love because a lot of his juvenile SF is some of the best, bar none, for sheer storytelling grab. And for his ability to write wonderful dialogue and fascinating characters-- when he's not phoning it in or going overboard to be a parody of himself. I still think "The Door Into Summer" is one of the great time travel novelettes.

OTOH, maybe you have to have read the stuff of his that I really like forty years ago, when it was fresh. A lot of things have become terribly dated. "Stranger in a Strange Land" is... well... best avoided now. But in the 1960s it resonated in a way that overcame its flaws.

opinionatedly,
Bright