Bradley’s review of Glory Road > Likes and Comments

I think Heinlein needed someone to call him out when he strayed too far into solipsistic la-la land, but he was such a genre institution by that point that nobody had the guts to do it. For me, his last tolerable book was The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, but even that one was more soapbox diatribe about his perfect world of manly men, sexy, smart and submissive women, and libertarian fantasy, but at least it had his trademark humor and snarkiness.

Oh lol without his trademark humor and snarkiness, he'd never have gotten this popular to begin with! :)

I don't really mind most of his soapbox diatribes. He's called the Dean for a reason. :) I DO sometimes get annoyed by all the civic duty stuff and the submissiveness stuff, but other than that, he's a great man for ideas and clear and interesting prose, even in his later works.. or maybe his later works are even more idea-laden, which is why he was so willing to buck social conventions, maybe? idk. There's a reason why he's so controversial. Then again, James Joyce was seriously controversial, too.

I do respect Heinlein for always championing his ideas regardless of the times and sticking to his agenda, but the later books seem to have given up on the story-telling of his shorter, earlier books. I still prefer classics like Double Star and Door Into Summer, though I haven't read as many of his books as you.

I agree that the SF community was enriched by larger-than-life personalities like Heinlein, as well as people like Harlan Ellison. Can't all be mild-mannered scientific types, after all.

Well, he was a dirty old man in his novels, but I think most of that was all a reflection of what he felt for his wife, Virginia. :) And no, they can't all be as boring as Clarke.

Oh wait.. I didn't just go there, did I? ;) It helps that I began my lifelong love of SF because of Heinlein, I suppose, which is why I am an apologist for him. :) And I disagree about his giving up on his storytelling in the later novels. To Sail Beyond the Sunset was pretty brilliant and tear-worthy, and that wasn't just because it was published after his death. I'm not saying that ALL of his later novels are brilliant, mind you, just that he didn't give up on telling good stories. :)

Wild sexism! Woooooo! Ha! Another great review

Ouch, you did go there :-) I was thinking the same thing - Heinlein had more chutzpah than the next ten writers combined. I always liked Clarke's books (but not Asimov's, which I've never been impressed by), but I'd rather spend an hour at a party with Heinlein than the other two.

An hour at a party with Bob, now there is a thought!

Lol an hour at a party with Bob, Yes! Of course, we'd all be listening to the pained cries of all the women that passed within bottom-slapping distance, but it would still be worth it, especially when he'd get that huge grin on his face when one of the women slapped him back. :)

He has a great sense of humor, and I think that's what the other great authors lacked. :) I also think that's what a lot of modern SF is lacking, too, while fantasy is still on fire with all it's UF Snark. Where's our Douglas Adams? Where's our Harry Harrison? Alas. :)

This is a Heinlein novel I've not read. Great review, Brad.

:) Thanks :)

Ugh. *puts this on the never-to-read list*

Brad wrote: "Lol an hour at a party with Bob, Yes! Of course, we'd all be listening to the pained cries of all the women that passed within bottom-slapping distance, but it would still be worth it, especially w..."

Great points, Brad, you think too many modern writers take themselves too seriously? I always liked the line Heinlein was supposed to have used upon getting his first check, for his first published story Life-Line: what kind of racket is this? And that his days of doing honest work were over.

lol I loved the entire Grumbles from the Grave, too. He was an amazing man for all his faults. I still quote from him.

Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.

Writing is fine as long as you do it in private and wash your hands afterward.

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.

The art of writing is staring at a blank sheet of paper until blood droplets form on your brow.

(of course, I could be mangling any or all of these or misattributing them, but fuck it, it's the idea that counts and it fits him perfectly. :)

And Trish, don't blame you. Won't recommend it. It's still my least favorite Heinlein, too. :)

Well, even if you did blame me, I wouldn't care. ;P
If there's one thing I'll never stand for, it's sexism or rape-at-knifepoint or any similar stuff.

I'm going to try and start Grumbles this week

Trish: you must realize that Heinlein was against sexism, but he did it against the time and place he lived in, so there's a lot of "normal" sexism throughout it. Every single woman in his works was a statement against the bullshit. There was never rape in his books, at least not from the good guys, and the backlash against rape was always pretty much a firing squad, which I approve. :)

Lyn: I hope you don't mind lots and lots of personal letters to colleagues, because that's all it is, but because it's Heinlein, it's very emotional. :)

Brad wrote: "...and the backlash against rape was always pretty much a firing squad, which I approve..."

Well, a firing squad is never a bad idea. ;)

I wonder how many presidents of the united states would apply for the job if the end of service ended with one, every time?

Bwahahahahaha! That is one way of taking care of certain political problems. ;)

Heinlein, like JFK, remains a favorite for me, despite their many gender faults. The world has changed much since their glory days. I find it hard to give up my childhood heroes, despite how I now view them or their work!

When we still lack the spark that made these guys great, we always return to them despite their faults. Or maybe we love them more and defend them stronger Because of their faults. They were very brave. :)

The sexism bothered me a lot too! I am glad to not be alone in similar thought.

Nope, not alone, but to be fair, it was kinda expected back then. Like, across the board. I'm rather glad for the changes time has brought us, but unfortunately, it's far, far from universal. ; ;

I would brush off the casual (and not so casual) sexism in the book at “the times”, except that
a) it is present in every book he wrote from the 1940s through the 1980s
b) it does not appear (or at least not as blatantly) in the works of many of his contemporaries in the genres (Lewis, Bradbury, Clarke, Asimov, for instance).

*as

To be fair, Heinlein was also working his fiction into that same sexism discussion and he fought against it in a number of interesting ways. You can look at what he actually DID, however, and find a huge variety of solutions to our social ills. It's not just his red-headed wife repeated over and over.

Look at the culture he came from and lived through and then tell me he wasn't bucking the system. He became an icon for the sixties and seventies for BOTH militarism, social duty, AND sexual freedom and religious freedom.

It's not so easy to pigeonhole the writer unless you're just repeating what all the haters repeat. It's very easy to dismiss someone who doesn't share your current values.


When I re-read Heinlein now, I compare him to the blatant sexism rife through the 70's and 80's contemporary popular writers and he comes out downright MILD, progressive, and a lover of intelligent women above EVERYTHING else.

Those other writers you mention DID NOT bother themselves with the same topics. I've read the majority of each of them, if not everything by them. Lewis focused on religion, Bradbury on everyday life, Clarke on transcendent Big Ideas, and Asimov on Science, Mystery, and Logic. (Yes, I'm simplifying greatly.) But in each writer I saw a lot of sexism. The girls weren't allowed to fight in Lewis, Bradbury didn't have any convincing women, Clarke never much bothered with anything controversial, and Asimov has TONS of sexism that is usually buried beneath alloys or alien flesh. Just because the ideas are at one-remove doesn't mean we can't pick them out at a glance.)

At least Heinlein was brave enough to tackle them even if WE now find them weird. The man himself was very thoughtful, kind, and generous.

I don't know about "every book he wrote from the 1940s through the 1980s" but I read Starship Troopers and couldn't find any sexism. *shrugs*

lol

Bradley wrote: "and Asimov has TONS of sexism that is usually buried beneath alloys or alien flesh"

Oh yes, especially in the Foundation books. *sighs*
I wouldn't say "generous" because that implies a man's generosity is what allows women to have nice representation in books, which isn't what you meant, I know that, but that he was working on quite a big board, not limiting himself (neither in plot nor in characterizations).

You're right. And I meant by generous: his own expression of love in the best way he meant it. He didn't stint his love. It may not be everyone's idea of what they might want for themselves, but he was very generous in giving the best part of himself to the women in the books he wrote.

I mean, he LOVED Ginny to freaking death. So much so that 20 years of novels read like a love letter to his wife. :) She certainly didn't have a problem with A: nudity, B: being adored, C: expressing herself with blistering intelligence. And Heinlein gloried in every part of it. :) I thought it was charming as hell.

Thank you. I thought it was just me.

Nope, not just you! :)

Great review and comments - now I wonder if I should read it or not ?? So confused - I’ve never read anything by him but I think I want to give him a shot. Like we read classics. Any recommendations on which one to start with?

I agree. The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress is great. So is Starship Troopers. If you prefer his juveniles (basically YA with a heavy emphasis on real science and a go-getter attitude) then most of his early work is perfect. Have Space Suit—Will Travel

If you want some of his more 60's influential stuff or his wilder novels that actively push social boundaries, I would point to Stranger in a Strange Land or Time Enough for Love

LOOOL, you're review make the book sound like a soap opera.

It WAS! :)

OMG! I am so sorry I reread this. It is awful. There are fun bits when adventure is happening, but I can't stand the preaching. I am glad I read this when I either didn't understand cause too young or just skipped over the preachy bits. sigh. Voilà, this gets added to my list of adult disappointments.

Glory Road was more of a Gravel Road, no? But barefoot. :)

Bradley wrote: "Glory Road was more of a Gravel Road, no? But barefoot. :)"

yup, that sums it up: a barefoot slog (except for the adventure bits which I still enjoyed. They were just buried in loooooong discussions.)

This review really captures the novel. I might not be as liberal with the star rating but otherwise it is spot on.

Thanks! I just couldn't bear to give it an "Active Dislike" star rating because it was, after all, just problematic, not unenjoyable. lol

I think you need to be a young teen to like this book as much as I did when I was 12 or 13. I remember how much I liked the adventure bits. Reading it as an adult, I was surprised at the amount of preachy parts. sigh. Sometimes it is better NOT to re-read and keep the memory of the first reading instead.

Yikes ! I gave tbis one a 4 star review ???? In my defense, I read this book in about 1967 when I was 13 years old and feminism wasn't much of a widespread concept, especially in middle class New Orleans. I have no interest in slogging through it now just to lower the review. Should I just change it to match yours Brad, or just hang my head in shame ?

That is the right age to really enjoy the book. I would give it a four stars with the age range for context. :-)

Re-read. Always re-read if you’re in doubt. It’s good to re-examine yourself. :)

Damn. If it's worse than Farnham's Freehold or Sixth Column, it should probably be disposed of by one of those robot handlers they use for uranium.