Talk:Robert A. Heinlein: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:33, 27 June 2002

Latest revision as of 12:14, 24 May 2025

Line 1:

{{Talk header}}

(That seems at least a bit questionable. It is easy to get the impression reading Heinlein's fiction that the philosophical views are being lampooned rather than propagated. People who agree with the views probably think Heinlein is putting them seriously. Those who disagree either think Heinlein is having a joke, or throw the book away. It is also worth noting that these "philosophical views" are much less visible in his earlier works and only become strong starting with

{{American English}}

[[:The Cat Who Walks Through Walls|The Cat Who Walks Through Walls]], a work which had better be a joke at every level or it is just garbage.)

{{Article history

|action1=FAC

|action1date=14:40, 11 Jun 2005

|action1link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Robert A. Heinlein/archive1

|action1result=promoted

|action1oldid=15024868

|action2=FAR

----

|action2date=03:20, 14 March 2009

|action2link=Wikipedia:Featured article review/Robert A. Heinlein/archive1

|action2result=removed

|action2oldid=274996558

|maindate=July 20, 2005

Heinlein's personal views are well-documented from non-fiction works and interviews. No attempt was made to make novels consistent with any overall system of ideas, but it is clear that Heinlein sympathized with the views expressed by his sympathetic characters.

|currentstatus=FFA

}}

{{afd-merged-from|Competent man|Competent man (3rd nomination)|1 November 2023}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|listas=Heinlein, Robert A.|blp=no|1=

{{WikiProject Science Fiction|importance=Top}}

{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-priority=Mid|a&e-work-group=yes}}

{{WikiProject Children's literature|importance=low}}

{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low|libertarianism=yes|libertarianism-importance=low|American=yes|American-importance=low}}

{{WikiProject Missouri|importance=top}}

}}

{{To do}}

{{Annual readership|days=90|expanded=true}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

|maxarchivesize = 100K

|counter = 8

|minthreadsleft = 5

|minthreadstoarchive = 1

|archiveheader = {{atnhead}}

|algo = old(365d)

|archive = Talk:Robert A. Heinlein/Archive %(counter)d

}}

== Military-controlled government ==

----

Please provide years for the works. It would also be nice to sort by years, see discussion on [[:Wikipedia policy|Wikipedia policy]].

The statement "Space Cadet describes a future scenario where a military-controlled global government enforces world peace." seems inaccurate. There is no suggestion that the government is controlled by the military (the Space Patrol). The government is never mentioned. The only accurate statement is that the Space Patrol has a duty, presumably to a government but that is only an inference, to enforce peace. I think this statement should be changed. [[User:Zaslav|Zaslav]] ([[User talk:Zaslav|talk]]) 21:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

----

:The [https://www.nationalreview.com/2010/10/heinleins-conservatism-martin-morse-wooster/ source] for that para says {{tq|"In his 1949 novel Space Cadet, Heinlein depicts a future where peace is preserved through a global government controlled by the military."}}. [[User:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#066293;">'''Schazjmd'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#738276;">''(talk)''</span>]] 21:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Someone is going to have to justify the narrowmindedness of Kansas City, MO, more clearly than is currently done in the article. When Heinlein was born it was an incredibly dynamic place (ever heard of the Blues? Jazz? The meatpacking industry? The Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art?). Heinlein may have come from a narrowminded and provincial family, or have been packed off to visit narrowminded and provincial relatives elsewhere in Missouri, but I really think that blaming it on Kansas City is ill-informed. I am, I am quick to offer as a disclaimer, neither a Midwesterner nor even a frequent visitor. I have a strong feeling that Heinlein would have grown up to be much the same no matter where he had done the growing up. --MichaelTinkler

::Zaslav is right, and the National Review article is wrong.-Ben Crowell <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2603:8000:8900:6E00:79C8:DB5F:3DBF:D95E|2603:8000:8900:6E00:79C8:DB5F:3DBF:D95E]] ([[User talk:2603:8000:8900:6E00:79C8:DB5F:3DBF:D95E#top|talk]]) 20:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

----

:::What source is Zaslav citing when making their assertion? —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 21:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Why is it necessary to have one line stubs for each of the short stories this guy has written? There is more info on these stories in the list on this page than in those articles. PLEASE don't make these types of stubs -- they don't even give enough information to be classified as definitions. --[[user:maveric149|maveric149]]

::::His own reading comprehension, obviously. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:DA90:2AB0:CC40:5A96:6FF0:D992|2600:1700:DA90:2AB0:CC40:5A96:6FF0:D992]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:DA90:2AB0:CC40:5A96:6FF0:D992|talk]]) 10:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

:::::So you agree that the description should not be changed, then, since a change would rely on [[WP:NOR|original research]]? —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 11:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

::::::The source is dubious and as he pointed out, obviously wrong. [[Special:Contributions/2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:1508:FC82:66CC:D167|2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:1508:FC82:66CC:D167]] ([[User talk:2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:1508:FC82:66CC:D167|talk]]) 08:51, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

:::::::Again, what ''[[WP:Secondary sources|secondary source]]'' has presented an analysis of the novel counter to ''National Review''{{'}}s? —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 11:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

== Big Three -Vandalism ==

I'll stop making the stub articles, but I'm not entirely convinced.

The Big Three are, according to Brian W. Aldiss in Billion Year Spree, Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke and Ray Bradbury. Robert A. Heinlein never was one of them, this claim is "alternative facts" and this vandalism doesn't seem to be recent. Please correct.[[Special:Contributions/2001:7E8:C29C:2400:983E:960F:67FC:EB6|2001:7E8:C29C:2400:983E:960F:67FC:EB6]] ([[User talk:2001:7E8:C29C:2400:983E:960F:67FC:EB6|talk]]) 15:36, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

:''[https://books.google.com/books?id=MtCyDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA300 The Big Book of Science Fiction]'' identifies the "big three" as Asimov, Clarke, and Heinlein, as does ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=tPuzDwAAQBAJ&pg The Rise and Fall of American Science Fiction, from the 1920s to the 1960s]'', ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=p5U2EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA33 Science Fiction Literature Through History: An Encyclopedia]'', and ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=V-CNAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA8 Fifty Key Figures in Science Fiction]'' (which notes that van Vogt was replaced as one of the "big three" as his popularity waned and Clarke's grew). [[User:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#066293;">'''Schazjmd'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#738276;">''(talk)''</span>]] 15:56, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

:See also: [[Talk:Arthur C. Clarke#Big_Three_-Vandalism]] and [[Talk:Isaac Asimov#Big_Three_-Vandalism]]) [[User:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#066293;">'''Schazjmd'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#738276;">''(talk)''</span>]] 15:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

:I finally got hold of a copy of ''Billion Year Spree''. I cannot find the phrase "big three" anywhere in the book. I looked up each mention of Bradbury in the book, and it is never paired with Asimov and Clarke in any meaningful way. Do you have a page number for your reference? [[User:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#066293;">'''Schazjmd'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#738276;">''(talk)''</span>]] 19:48, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Obviously, there was no "big three". There were, of course, some science-fiction writers who were better known, more highly esteemed by critics or general audiences, or more commercially successful than others. I began reading science-fiction in the late sixties, and my impression then was that the three most important and best-known living science-fiction writers were Clarke, Asimov, and Bradbury. This valuation may have been colored partly by seeing Bradbury more often on television and personally much prefering Bradbury to Heinlein; I'm not sure. I ranked Heinlein fourth in stature, but I liked Fred Hoyle, whom I ranked fifth in stature, much more. Around the time I turned thirteen I decided that the only science-fiction writer who ever really mattered was H.G. Wells. A decade and a half later I added Stanislaw Lem. A few worthy one-works forays into the field by various other writers aside, I've never since wavered. [[User:TheScotch|TheScotch]] ([[User talk:TheScotch|talk]]) 12:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

==Original research and opinion in article==

While generally a good article, with lots of details, the article does seem to include a lot of unsourced opinions about Heinlein's inspirations and evaluations of his work. All opinions need to be attributed to reliable sources (random fan websites do not count). I'm going to start cleaning it up. If you feel stronly about any of it, let's discuss it here. [[User:Ashmoo|Ashmoo]] ([[User talk:Ashmoo|talk]]) 13:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

== Extremely misleading intro ==

Intro implies he was a socialist throughout his life. Later article says that that was only his early years, and radically changed his politics as time went on. Needs changing!! [[User:Charlielutra24|Charlielutra24]] ([[User talk:Charlielutra24|talk]]) 12:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:I tweaked the intro slightly to cover views in his later years. [[User:Deagol2|Deagol2]] ([[User talk:Deagol2|talk]]) 16:22, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

== Hard sci-fi source? ==

“ he was among the first to emphasize scientific accuracy in his fiction, and was thus a pioneer of the subgenre of hard science fiction” is in the intro. Is there a source for that? I would say his work is mostly moments of hard science fiction with fantasy undertones. The human Martian from Stranger in a Strange Land comes to mind. [[User:Your Glutes|Your Glutes]] ([[User talk:Your Glutes|talk]]) 07:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)