Which Heinlein book should i read next????

[TTBRAHWTMG]

It's great to see a 21 year old biting into Heinlein. I'm 35, and find that I am usually atleast a couple decades younger than most Heinlein fans I run into. Don't worry too much about what you pick next, they are all worth reading. I would avoid The Number of the Beast atleast for a little while though. Unusually flawed for Heinlein, and you have to be a secure fan to appreciate the value that is in there.
If you liked SIASL for its unique perspective and commentary on religion, definately try JOB, it will blow you away. If you appreciated the commentary on government interference, try Moon Is A Harsh Mistress. If you liked the sexual attitudes of the nests, try any of his Long family stuff, you'll love Maureen! If you just fell in love with the characters and their dialogue, don't worry, you'll fall for almost all of his characters (although Jubal will always be one of my favourites...Front!)
Bottom line...just make sure you pick up another Heinlein, period. Oh, how I envy you. So much unread Heinlein to bite into!

P.S. How do I get my hands on one of those T-shirts, Liz?

 

[j d worthington]

There are two I'd add a caution about, though I think they're still worth reading; but they're not nearly as good as Heinlein can be: Rocketship Galileo (1947) and Sixth Column (a.k.a. The Day After Tomorrow; serial 1941; book 1949). The first was his first juvenile, and is quite wobbly. Some brilliant stuff in there, and some that was definitely "written with his left hand", as it were. Sixth Column was written at the behest of John W. Campbell, and was a project Heinlein was less than enthusiastic about and, again, it shows....

 

[Pyan]

Consider it being done! Well, I'm not able to reproduce it exactly, because 1) I've never seen it; B) copyright law. But I am beginning a t-shirt shop featuring Heinlein-inspired designs, and I'll put this one in. Look for it in the next couple days.--Liz

I doubt there would be any copyright restriction on the t-shirt design itself, because I'm pretty sure it was a "one-off - we print your own design" job. Whether or not the actual words themselves are still copyright - I don't know.

The design itself looked something like:

PANTHEISTIC
SOLIPSISM
RULES!
RAH! RAH! RAH!

Hope this is some help
​

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

There are two I'd add a caution about, though I think they're still worth reading; but they're not nearly as good as Heinlein can be: Rocketship Galileo (1947) and Sixth Column (a.k.a. The Day After Tomorrow; serial 1941; book 1949). The first was his first juvenile, and is quite wobbly. Some brilliant stuff in there, and some that was definitely "written with his left hand", as it were. Sixth Column was written at the behest of John W. Campbell, and was a project Heinlein was less than enthusiastic about and, again, it shows....

Glad you put the "still worth reading" in there...Galileo in particular. I found that one great for three reasons.
1/ You can read it in one sitting. Few hours and your done. It's like a Heinlein "snack" almost.
2/ Had some great science in it...agree a little wobbly in hindsight...but for 1947?
3/ I think this book really encapsulates a recurring theme of Heinlein's. Even discounting that it was a juvenile, this book demonstrated the tendency to underestimate the development and competency of our society's youth, and our tendency to undervalue the contributions that some of them are willing and capable of making.
I wish I had someone like a Cargraves in my life at their young age...an adult who actually showed respect for my intellect and abilities. I guess it could be argued that Cargraves was just using them due to his budget, but I think Heinlein's respect for young minds shows through regardless.

Your right though...definately "wobbly", and probably his least realistic depiction of an antagonist. His simplistic protrayal of Nazism would almost seem like an argument against his respect for young minds, but I think it was really more of a reflection of the times and maybe even his own personal fears..1947.

 

[j d worthington]

Well, I wasn't really referring to the science there; more the structure. It's an awkwardly structured book, in some ways; a bit angular, a definite "first" in the series, before he'd got the feel of the particular demands of a juvenile down.

But yes, I'd agree on his views about juveniles ... and why not? He was born in an era where there was still pioneering going on (as was Bob Howard) and very young children had often to take on roles that people today would simply not give them credit for being able to do... fending off hostile Indians, for one (Sul Ross, one-time governor of Texas, was doing such at age 7, for instance), or hunting, home doctoring, etc.... even aiding at birthing at that age. And, for my money, these kids were a darned sight healthier when it came to dealing with life in general because of it. Just as I think we do ourselves a disservice by distancing ourselves so much from death... it makes us more afraid of it, not less -- and certainly not as able to cope with the loss as those who dealt with the entire process themselves. We see such times as dark and barbaric, but they were considerably closer to the "fundamentals" of life than any of the so-called fundamentalists (religious or otherwise) today... and had a healthier respect for it in consequence, generally speaking. It also meant they were more sensitive to nuances than the bludgeoned generations of today, I'm afraid....

So, yes, wonky and wobbly... but still well worth reading...

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

Well, I wasn't really referring to the science there; more the structure. It's an awkwardly structured book, in some ways; a bit angular, a definite "first" in the series, before he'd got the feel of the particular demands of a juvenile down.

Not being much of a writer myself, I find it easier than most to overlook literary flaws. I am so focussed on the content and quality of the ideas the author is putting forth. Having said that, once I read the above, it rings true.

But yes, I'd agree on his views about juveniles ... and why not? He was born in an era where there was still pioneering going on (as was Bob Howard) and very young children had often to take on roles that people today would simply not give them credit for being able to do...

I am showing my ignorance here...never heard of Bob Howard...had to look him up. Tragic life by the sounds of it. Worth reading? Question though, if Heinlein's respect for young minds was a byproduct of his era, then what is the source of my own. I'm born in '71 and have been exposed to nothing but more and more government interference and coddling of youth. Look at toys alone. Most of the toys I played with as a kid are either illegal now or atleast frowned on, and I'm only 35. Going to have to do some thinking on this one.

Just as I think we do ourselves a disservice by distancing ourselves so much from death... it makes us more afraid of it, not less -- and certainly not as able to cope with the loss

100% agree.

We see such times as dark and barbaric, but they were considerably closer to the "fundamentals" of life than any of the so-called fundamentalists (religious or otherwise) today...

Not me...if anything I'm young enough that I've probably romanticized it and could probably use a dose of reality to put it more in perspective. I so often find myself wishing that I was born into a time where the population was sparse enough to not require identification...I'm sure you recognize the reference...and am so frustrated that I only missed by a generation, max 2.

 

[j d worthington]

Some very good thoughts here. Nice discussion. Okay... on Robert E. Howard... I'd say yes, a fair amount of his work is definitely worth reading; but try to find editions that go back to Howard's work, and leave behind those who have edited, "collaborated", or added to his stuff. Some of those are indeed enjoyable, some are even good... but most are at best watered-down versions of the real thing. Howard has his flaws, god knows, but for sheer passion and a sort of barbaric poetry (such as one might find in the early sagas or the eddas) he can't be beat. He was also keenly aware of the underlying tragedy of life, and his philosophy was very much that "barbarism is the natural state of mankind.... Civilization is unnatural. It is a whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph." Now, if you combine that with the idea of the Greek philosophers that one can tell the level of civilization of a culture by the number of laws deemed necessary... I'd say Two-Gun hit it right on the head.....

Question though, if Heinlein's respect for young minds was a byproduct of his era, then what is the source of my own. I'm born in '71 and have been exposed to nothing but more and more government interference and coddling of youth. Look at toys alone. Most of the toys I played with as a kid are either illegal now or atleast frowned on, and I'm only 35. Going to have to do some thinking on this one.

And I don't think it was just it being a product of his generation. But he had practical examples surrounding him, as well as in very recent history that he would have had before him. That's something we're too distanced from to apply, in most cases... not to mention the fact that we seem to be damned determined to completely lose touch with our history at all costs.....

In your own (or any other individual's) case, it might well be because of those around you growing up, or your reading, or a combination of both. There are still people out there with that attitude (thank goodness!) but we seem to be distinctly in the minority....

We see such times as dark and barbaric, but they were considerably closer to the "fundamentals" of life than any of the so-called fundamentalists (religious or otherwise) today...

Not me...if anything I'm young enough that I've probably romanticized it and could probably use a dose of reality to put it more in perspective. I so often find myself wishing that I was born into a time where the population was sparse enough to not require identification...I'm sure you recognize the reference...and am so frustrated that I only missed by a generation, max 2.

Probably a bit of romanticising from both of us on this... though, in my case, I had a lot of relatives from that generation that I grew up around, and plenty of people who had done pioneering that I knew, and they did seem much more healthy and less neurotic than any generation since. They could be hard-headed as all get-out... but they could handle darned near anything life threw at 'em, too -- no matter how nasty -- and without having such trouble with it... even well into their eighties and up. So I'd say there's some definite truth to the idea. Also... as noted above, the fact that we're having to be ID'd to death, the fact that children are given scare tactics to teach them simple practical ways of staying safe (and who the heck ever said life was safe for any of us), to the point of often crippling 'em when it comes to dealing with the inevitable crises life will have; the crunching on personal freedoms, etc.... I'd say that those are all aspects that need addressing. And people are too prone to think that things are getting better there, or that it wasn't really that free back then. In some ways, they're right. But in the main... no. As any unbiassed look at history will show, we've been losing our freedoms at an alarming rate for over a century now, and not for any good reason... but rather to make the populace much easier to control. It's like children being diagnosed with various disorders and put on medication when, in the majority (not all) cases, they're just perfectly healthy, active youngsters who need an outlet for that energy. But they're a nuisance that way, so ... give 'em the meds -- all too easily, I'm afraid. (Genuine cases where it's needed, I've no problem with. But there is absolutely no way that the vast majority of kids need that; what they need is a healthy environment to be kids in, and we're doing a bang-up job of getting rid of that....)

Sorry. Off on a rant. But it applies to many of the issues Heinlein addresses in his work, so not totally off-topic, at least. Just a good deal broader than addressing the original question....

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

Okay... on Robert E. Howard... I'd say yes, a fair amount of his work is definitely worth reading; but try to find editions that go back to Howard's work, and leave behind those who have edited, "collaborated", or added to his stuff.

In your own (or any other individual's) case, it might well be because of those around you growing up, or your reading, or a combination of both.

Sorry. Off on a rant. But it applies to many of the issues Heinlein addresses in his work, so not totally off-topic, at least. Just a good deal broader than addressing the original question....

Thanks for the Bob Howard recommendation. I've got good relationships with several quality used book stores and am certain I can get my hands on originals.

I'm not your typical Heinlein fan...atleast not compared to the ones I've met. I spent the first 16 years of my life surviving. Unfortunately not the exciting dangers that Heinlein protaganists face, but the more insidious abuse and neglect stuff...not "Daddy spanked me and read the newspaper" but the real headline making stuff. Enough about that, bottom line...as a young man with no direction or positive influence I turned to drugs and crime to salve my wounds.

By 18 I had hit bottom. From my little cell, I sat and thought about my life. For the first time in years I was sober enough to start to think clearly. For the first time in my life, I CHOSE to stop feeling sorry for myself, and realized that regardless of my youth, I was now an adult and the only one responsible for the consequences of the choices I made from here out. This wasn't taught to me...it was an innate understanding. To make a long story short, that marked the turning point in my life. Oh, I fell on my face plenty of times after that...1 step forward, 2 steps back...and still do occasionally.

It was shortly after this time that I ran into Heinlein. His recurring theme of personal responsibility that you referred to in another thread is part of what instinctually drew me to him. It was his respect for young minds and his ability to wrap his ideas in fast paced and often humourous plots, that helped solidify the relationship. Besides, Thorby really had it bad...who was I to feel sorry for myself? One passage really hit home...Maureen and her Father discussing her own commandments...I sat down and wrote out my own and have been living by them ever since.

My life has been a struggle for personal improvement, and especially a deep desire to not perpetuate the cycle. I work hard to recognize, understand, control, and eliminate drives that were planted in my youth. It became of utmost importance to me to "heal" myself to atleast a point where I could ensure my relationships, especially with my wife and children, did not mirror those I had witnessed and experienced in my youth.

Heinlein became like a father/professor to me. Much of what I have read outside of Heinlein was inspired by him and a need for better understanding of ideas that he presented to me. Either that, or inspired through discussion with another Heinlein fan. Better educated, more widely read, and "healthier" Heinlein fans became like auntuncle/professors to me, whether they meant to or not.

I say all this only to expain why my posts often reflect oversight of literary flaws...why I am such a rabid Heinlein fan...why I haven't read many works that are considered general knowledge by most...why I am so interested and focussed on what makes ME tick...why my arguments and insights into Heinlein are often one dimensional...and why I appreicate "rants" like yours.

 

[Razorback]

As any unbiassed look at history will show, we've been losing our freedoms at an alarming rate for over a century now, and not for any good reason... but rather to make the populace much easier to control. It's like children being diagnosed with various disorders and put on medication when, in the majority (not all) cases, they're just perfectly healthy, active youngsters who need an outlet for that energy. But they're a nuisance that way, so ... give 'em the meds -- all too easily, I'm afraid. (Genuine cases where it's needed, I've no problem with. But there is absolutely no way that the vast majority of kids need that; what they need is a healthy environment to be kids in, and we're doing a bang-up job of getting rid of that....)

I agree with your observations about the tendency to medicate children when it’s not really necessary or appropriate. Some of the “professionals” recommended Ridilin for my son when he was young. He may have has a mild case of ADHD or something similar, but nothing that required more than a little patience at times. I’m glad I was pigheaded enough to resist the drug suggestions. My son has thrived without them.

I don’t fully agree that some of our modern loss of freedoms or anonymity is “not for any good reason” in all cases. I think greater population densities and vulnerabilities inherent in a high-tech society make some of the losses or reduction necessary, although regrettable.

 

[j d worthington]

Thanks for the Bob Howard recommendation. I've got good relationships with several quality used book stores and am certain I can get my hands on originals.

Actually, that's precisely what you don't want to do; not if you want Howard the way he wrote it. It's actually the more recent editions, such as those from Del Rey, that are disencumbering Howard of all the encrustations that have gathered about his work over the past 70 years. There are some others, such as Wildside Press, that are going back to the original magazine versions, and a British edition of the complete Conan that went back to Howard's original mss. (including fragments, etc.). Those are well worth investing in, and the majority of them are fairly cheap. The old Lancer/Ace paperbacks (as fond as I am of them, for they are how I first read most of Howard's stuff) are chock-full of unnecessary editing, alterations, stories by various other hands, and non-Conan stories that de Camp revised into Conan stories for the series.

On your other statements, all I can say it: Congratulations! and Good for you! You've been down a very rough road, and come to a realization that few do. You are to be commended for taking responsibility for yourself.

On Heinlein being your "professor"... I'm always reminded of something Robert Bloch said about HPL: "Lovecraft was my university", for much the same reasons. Joshi has agreed. I'll add my voice in there, as well. So no need to be apologetic about this devotion to RAH; from what I understand, the man was a genuine gentleman in person, and there are much, much worse role models to take. I'd just caution you to read him critically (something I do do with HPL, though many might dispute that ); this helps to keep him in perspective, and still to learn the lessons he has to teach, without losing one iota of respect for the man or his work. (An unnecessary caution, perhaps; but useful nonetheless.)

Razorback... perhaps; but I'm quite dubious about that assertion; certainly taken to the levels it has been. A certain amount of liberties we may have to compromise on, but this wholesale abandonment of them... no. That is for no reason other than to make a populace that is much easier to manipulate. Divide, keep ignorant, and disempower, and they are conquered for life. As Heinlein said, "Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked"; and that's a process that's been in high-gear for quite some time now....

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

Actually, that's precisely what you don't want to do; not if you want Howard the way he wrote it. It's actually the more recent editions, such as those from Del Rey, that are disencumbering Howard of all the encrustations that have gathered about his work over the past 70 years.

Thanks for the tip here...I put out calls to a couple of my closest used book contacts...didn't like what I got back. I discussed how I was looking for "pure" Howard, and the only hit I got was an original December 1933 Weird Stories. He wanted a pretty penny for it, and I don't doubt that there are plenty (okay maybe a few) who would be willing to pay it...but I'm not one of them. He was probably trying to pawn it off on me as he knows I've been willing to pay through the nose for some of my original Heinlein's and some of my 1st printings. Was feeling a little dejected about my lack of success...that is until I came back here and read the above. New mission tomorrow!

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

I'd just caution you to read him critically (something I do do with HPL, though many might dispute that ); this helps to keep him in perspective, and still to learn the lessons he has to teach, without losing one iota of respect for the man or his work. (An unnecessary caution, perhaps; but useful nonetheless.)

Oh...and thanks for this too. I'd like to think that it is indeed "an unnecessary caution", although I am sure "many might dispute that" as well. It is actually when I find Heinlein hardest to believe, or disagree with him completely, or find myself taking offense at something he states, that I find I learn the most. I have this drive to get to the source for myself that leads me to chasing loose ends of arguments all over. It reminds me of something else Heinlein said (I just spent 3 hrs unsuccessfully chasing another quote, I'm not even going to bother to try to get this one right)...something along the lines of preferring to read things that don't agree with his point of view, and that you can't learn from a man that agrees with you.

 

[j d worthington]

Yes, Pyan quoted that one a while back: "I never learned anything from a man who agreed with me", I believe is the way it goes.

As for the Weird Tales magazine you were offered. Yes, I'm sure it was a pretty penny, as the WT issues with Howard, Clark Ashton Smith, or H. P. Lovecraft go for a young mint these days. Even 20+ years ago they were worth one heck of a lot. For those who have the money, well worth it, both because that particular magazine is one of the most highly prized of the pulp era, and because -- having a Howard story -- the value is only going to appreciate as long as it is well taken care of. (I know not only from knowing collectors, but because I once had a fairly good run of them... had to sell them at one point, which was one heck of a wrench, believe me... but I didn't lose anything monetarily on it... only the intangibles. )

Also, thought you might enjoy taking a look at this (though it ties in more with your other thread on RAH):

Heinlein Society Updates

And this will give you information on which of the Howard volumes are out there from the Del Rey series:

Del Rey Online

As for the other -- yes, that's been my experience with Lovecraft, for instance; as he was so well-read, and had such wide-ranging interests, he's led me into numerous places literarily, scientifically, philosophically, historically, and otherwise, that have enriched my life; things I most likely would never have known had it not been for my interest in HPL. So I can quite understand what you say about Heinlein -- another man who was prodigiously well-read, in truth. (Besides, his work was where I first heard of Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy....)

The Anatomy of Melancholy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

Also, thought you might enjoy taking a look at this (though it ties in more with your other thread on RAH):

Heinlein Society Updates

Thanks for the link. Quite the comprehensive study...I think most of what the author was saying I've absorbed through osmosis while reading and rereading Heinlein, although it was quite enjoyable to read another person's articulation of the summary. I have always thought that it was interesting that Heinlein wrote so much about youth, and especially parenting, considering he never had children. I often debated with myself whether it was sincere respect for young minds, or whether Heinlein was campaigning for influence over young minds in an effort to cultivate future proponents for the space program. Af first I decided it was the former...now I'm not certain the two are mutually exclusive.

I read through the first two thirds of the essay pretty much nodding my head. My only exceptions were that I found myself getting defensive when Podkayne was attacked for poor parenting, but being honest with myself it wasn't so much disagreement as just a gut feeling, I really liked that Clark kid personally...and had little doubt that he would find his way. I felt that Farnham's Freehold should have been in here too, instead of lumped into the final third about incest. It felt like the author knew his final argument was weak so he purposely forced Farnham's in there to help balance the citings. Incest was touched very briefly, and wasn't a theme, but rather more an exploration of the realities of being stuck in such a situation. In fact, when I think of Farnham's...it's been awhile, I must re-read soon...I can barely remember that passage. I think Heinlein put much greater emphasis on the destructiveness of the Mother Son relationship in that book, and Farnham's really belonged in the second section.

The final third is where I think the author completely fell off the rails. It almost seems like they are arguing that Heinlein's purpose in his later works was purely to titilate. It seems to suggest a lack of maturity that I just never smelled when reading Heinlein. I see his exploration of the theme as a typical Heinlein "what if?" scenario, and his following through to completion, even at the risk of turning off some readers. He starts with the premise that incest's taboo is purely a product of socialization built up around the necessary moral, Heinlein's definition of moral, avoidance of genetic consequence. He always divorces these character's from our society before he allows them to explore how relief from socialization would affect the taboo. Ira and following generations were already divorced in many ways as they were breeding for long-life, and it seems as each generation was liberated more and more from socialization...actually until eventually they were so different they had to leave the planet. Glory Road showed a culture developed in a different dimension, and in Stranger Mike had to be raised by Martians to be taboo-free enough to explore sexuality the way he did.
I also noticed the author used alot more external references in the third section, where the first two thirds were almost completely Heinlein references. It almost seemed like he knew he couldn't make his point referring to Heinlein's work, so had to go to others' criticism of Heinlein's work to support his premise. Maybe I'm missing his point...but if it is that Heinlein's inclusion of these themes was purely to titilate, I'll let Heinlein speak for himself as he does in The Robert Heinlein Interview "...and all I can say about that is that it was not intended to have that effect but if it did, my congratulations to you!"
Admittedly, I'm shooting from the hip on this one, and just expressing my first reaction to it. As I like to say...I'm going to need to think about this one. There were some references in the third section that I'm going to have to chase down now, and read first hand. I often wonder if Heinlein did have children of his own, would he have been able to explore the incest theme as capably as he did? I for one, am a product of my socialization on this one, but found his exploration stimulating, atleast mentally.

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

(Besides, his work was where I first heard of Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy....)

The Anatomy of Melancholy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder if Bob Howard would have benefited at all from a study of such a book? Where did you pick him up through Heinlein? It isn't one of the one's that really provoked me, and I can't immediately figure out the reference. Time to do some more digging...stretching, stretching, stretching...thanks once again.

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

Aaaaah....Farnham's Freehold...how coincidental that I had that book in the forefront of my mind while reviewing Rafeeq McGiveron's essay. Two reasons for a re-read now.

 

[j d worthington]

It's been a while since I've read my Heinlein (it's been in storage for some years now -- along with about half, or better than, of my library -- and I've only pulled it out this week, in an attempt to work it in with the research reading), so I don't recall the exact mention. I just remember the title struck me, as a youth, as somewhat unusual for something in Heinlein....

Come to think of it... and this may be completely erroneous ... I think it was in Stranger in a Strange Land... Jubal, if I remember correctly.

As for Robert E. Howard... No, I don't think Two-Gun would have benefited from that. He had a strong streak of romanticism in his nature, and had an interesting view of the Irish character which bolstered his stubbornness and rapid emotional swings. I'd say he had some genuine psychological disorders with an organic basis, myself... but -- tragic though his end was -- I'm not sure I'd have changed him. Without that personality, I don't think his work would have near the power it does; and there have been no few great writers, artists, and musicians whose very intensity of feeling led to short lives. Even those who didn't commit suicide, it's almost as if they were such a distillation of powerful human emotions that they couldn't have lasted very long (Keats, for example, or C. M. Kornbluth with his astringent, biting satirical view of humanity).

On the essay... yes, it's food for thought. I've run into a lot of people who are at least a bit troubled by the incest theme in Heinlein... but it's a fairly common theme in literature in general, when you look at it. One of the best sf stories on the theme I've found is Theodore Sturgeon's "If All Men Were Brothers, Would You Let One Marry Your Sister..." in Harlan Ellison's Dangerous Visions anthology. Sturgeon was one who explored the theme of love in various permutations, as well as human relationships in general, with a probing and questioning manner that was both entertaining and thought-provoking; and he didn't mind asking uncomfortable questions. He's been perceived as arguing for incest in that story, but I don't see that as the case. He was asking questions about why it engenders such strong reactions rather than allowing for calm and rational debate, whether this is a good thing or not, and what the bases for such a reaction might be, and whether they are genuine or apparent. As he says in his afterword to the story, with this -- as with nearly everything he did in his stories -- he brings out a common argument for or against something, and asks "Why?". Then when that one gets answered with an ad hominem response, he asks a further "Why?" and so on, until some actual thinking on the subject has to be done, and the person must either think it through and come up with good solid answers on their own, or go researching the facts to bolster whatever the position is... which was the point. To make people think about their stance on any subject -- much like Heinlein himself (who sometimes had a main character take a stance completely alien to Heinlein's own, and quite often deliberately took an outrageous stance to poke the reader into thinking through an issue).

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

It's been a while since I've read my Heinlein (it's been in storage for some years now -- along with about half, or better than, of my library -- and I've only pulled it out this week, in an attempt to work it in with the research reading), so I don't recall the exact mention. I just remember the title struck me, as a youth, as somewhat unusual for something in Heinlein...

Work it in with the research reading? Lost me. I don't recall Jubal ever mentioning it, and he is one of my favourites. It does appear in a list of works that Farnham felt necessary to take into his shelter. Could this be it? Was it just a title reference or do you have recollection of Heinlein discussing his work at all?

One of the best sf stories on the theme I've found is Theodore Sturgeon's "If All Men Were Brothers, Would You Let One Marry Your Sister..." in Harlan Ellison's Dangerous Visions anthology.

Adding it to my reading list Prof....uhmmm...I mean JD.

As he says in his afterword to the story, with this -- as with nearly everything he did in his stories -- he brings out a common argument for or against something, and asks "Why?". Then when that one gets answered with an ad hominem response, he asks a further "Why?" and so on, until some actual thinking on the subject has to be done, and the person must either think it through and come up with good solid answers on their own, or go researching the facts to bolster whatever the position is... which was the point.

This reminds me of root-cause analysis theory from my early industrial employment. When I was a process engineer in the automotive industry we used a principle called "The 5 Whys". The idea was when you ran into a production or quality defect you were to ask yourself why? Once answered you should ask yourself why? and so on. Statistically the theory indicates that once you've carved through 5 layers of whys you were probably at or approaching root cause.

 

[j d worthington]

Work it in with the research reading? Lost me. I don't recall Jubal ever mentioning it, and he is one of my favourites. It does appear in a list of works that Farnham felt necessary to take into his shelter. Could this be it? Was it just a title reference or do you have recollection of Heinlein discussing his work at all?

Ah. The "research reading" is a very long research project I've been working on for some time, and will be for at least another 5-6 years, it looks like, as the secondary (and even some primary) sources keep burgeoning, if I'm going to do this well. However, it is enjoyable... just doesn't leave much time for reading other things.

And I recall it just being a mention of, and a brief note on -- a fondness for, as I recall. If I should remember the details, or be able to track it down, I'll let you know.

As for Dangerous Visions -- it had a fairly recent re-release with a new retrospective introduction by Ellison, looking at the book over a quarter century later (it was first published in 1967). There is another such anthology, Again, Dangerous Visions, you might also want to look into. And, for that matter, Ellison as a whole might be worth reading, as he's as strong on personal responsibility in his own way as Heinlein is on his... but he has a different style and is very aggressive in tone. Damned fine writer, once he hit his stride:

Harlan Ellison - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here's a short version (lacking individual citations for short stories, essays, etc.) of a bibliography of his work I posted:

http://www.chronicles-network.com/forum/11559-harlan-ellison-bibliography.html

Unfortunately, a lot of these are no longer in print, so you'll have to get them through libraries. I'd suggest starting with his work from the mid-1960s, as some of his earlier work is a young writer's work, and a bit rough around the edges (some of, though, is very, very good, such as Spider Kiss and Memos from Purgatory, or most of the work in Gentleman Junkie). Also, his screenplays, where available, are well worth reading -- easy to read, and quite an experience -- he has a very good visual sense, and his scripts are visual experiences....

This reminds me of root-cause analysis theory from my early industrial employment. When I was a process engineer in the automotive industry we used a principle called "The 5 Whys". The idea was when you ran into a production or quality defect you were to ask yourself why? Once answered you should ask yourself why? and so on. Statistically the theory indicates that once you've carved through 5 layers of whys you were probably at or approaching root cause.

Could be where Sturgeon got it... or this could simply be his own nature -- I'm inclined to think the latter. Incidentally, if you can find a copy of his "The [Widget], the [Wadget], and Boff", I highly recommend this one. I know it can be found in A Treasury of Great Science Fiction, vol. 1 (it's a two-volume set) ed. by Anthony Boucher -- which in itself (the two volumes) is a wonderful anthology of sf up to 1959 (incidentally, it includes "The Man Who Sold the Moon" and "Waldo"), including four novels: Re-Birth (a.k.a. The Crysalids) by John Wyndham; The Weapon Shops of Isher by A. E. van Vogt; Brain-Wave by Poul Anderson, and The Stars My Destination by Alfred Bester -- as well as a host of short stories, novelettes, and novellas.

 

[TTBRAHWTMG]

Ah. The "research reading" is a very long research project I've been working on for some time, and will be for at least another 5-6 years, it looks like, as the secondary (and even some primary) sources keep burgeoning, if I'm going to do this well. However, it is enjoyable... just doesn't leave much time for reading other things.

Yikes! Professional or personal? I hope you get paid...big...whether it be in dollars or personal satisfaction.