My first experience
with Robert Heinlein's science fiction came when I was that lonely,
new-kid-in-town, sixth grader. I was
given Have Space Suit, Will Travel to
read and I devoured it. Read it through
three times in a row. I read it on the playground during recess. Since then I’ve gone on to read more of
Heinlein’s books. Some I’ve loved almost
as much as that first, others I’ve had to force myself to finish reading.
But remaining right along with Have Space Suit, Will Travel in my list of treasured favorites has been The Moon is a Harsh Mistress – Heinlein’s novel of political revolution on the moon. It was originally published as a serial in 1965 -66 and published as a novel in 1966. It received the Hugo Award for best Science Fiction novel in 1967. It is a brilliant book in many ways – but brevity, being the soul of wit, especially. The novel is not long. It is not plodding (as some of his works tended to be.) The plot moves along briskly but not at the expense of detailed development of the setting.
Within the relatively
narrow confines of the front and back covers, he manages to show the reader a
fully developed Loonie (the resident’s of the scattered underground Lunar
colonies) culture. The Loonies are
criminals, exiled political dissidents or the children and grandchild thereof,
and their revolution is the fight is to free themselves of the oppressive Lunar
Authority – whose polices treat the Loonies as slaves , and whose demands and
quotas are stripping the moon of its resources in order to feed an
overpopulated Earth below.
The story manages to include political discussions (obviously) but also discussions about polyandrous marriages, political history, artificial intelligence, astrophysics, and, and, and etc… The depth is surprising considering, again, that it’s not a long novel – less than 400 pages.
The story manages to include political discussions (obviously) but also discussions about polyandrous marriages, political history, artificial intelligence, astrophysics, and, and, and etc… The depth is surprising considering, again, that it’s not a long novel – less than 400 pages.
But in this, my most
recent re-reading of TMIAHM, I have
to admit, I was not quite as charged by it.
I am, by nature (or nurture (or both)) a bit of a revolutionist. I admire
the revolutionary spirit. And when I
first read this book I loved it. I
gushed about it. I thrilled to it. But not so much, this time. The
Rational-Anarchy of the character Professor Bernardo de La Paz doesn’t
interest me nearly as much as it did before. I don’t believe that :
concepts such as ‘state’ and ‘society’ and ‘government’ have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. … that it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame . . . as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else.
Perhaps my affection
for the book has been blunted by the idiocies of the Libertarian / Tea Party
movements. Perhaps it’s because I believe that we (as individuals) are responsible to and
for each other- as individuals and as a communal whole. I am my brother and my sister’s keeper.
But still, I like the
book, quite a bit, even if it doesn’t thrill me as it did before.
No comments:
Post a Comment