Status
Available
Call number
Publication
Fawcett Columbine (New York, 1980). 1st Fawcett Columbine edition, 1st printing. 511 pages. $6.95.
Description
When two male and two female supremely sensual, unspeakably cerebral humans find themselves under attack from aliens who want their awesome quantum breakthrough, they take to the skies -- and zoom into the cosmos on a rocket roller coaster ride of adventure and danger, ecstasy and peril.
Media reviews
NBD/Biblion (via BOL.com)
Recensie(s)
Een koppige geleerde, zijn mooie dochter, een fantastische piloot en een 1.50 m. grote feministe belanden met een ruimte/tijdmachine in alternatieve universa waar ze de meest ongelooflijke avonturen beleven, op jacht naar het Beest der Openbaringen. Heinlein is altijd een vrij
Show More
controversieel SF-schrijver geweest, en dit is erg duidelijk geworden met dit boek. Het is inderdaad een zeer opmerkelijk werk met een bijzonder rijk scala van onderwerpen in die typische, onnavolgbare Heinlein-stijl. Het boek heeft wekenlang nr. 1 gestaan op de Amerikaanse bestsellerslijsten, wat bewijst dat SF op dit niveau een zeer groot publiek kan aanspreken. De kontroversiele inhoud van dit boek bewijst dat Heinlein een encyclopedische kennis bezit en dat hij die treffend, spannend en toch intellektueel verantwoord kan verwoorden. Duidelijk is dat bijna geen SF-schrijver de beperkingen van het genre zo drastisch heeft doorbroken als Heinlein in dit boek.
(NBD|Biblion recensie, B. van Laerhoven.) Show Less
User reviews
LibraryThing member ShelfMonkey
There are few things more distressing – from a bibliophile point of view, anyway – than a favoured author who fails.
Certainly, the literary world is rife with examples of acclaimed authors who fail, at various times in their lives, to meet expectations. Is there any Ernest Hemingway novel more
Add to the list of the ignoble this entry: Robert A. Heinlein should never, NEVER have written THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST. It should have remained locked away in a file drawer somewhere, gathering dust, and consigned to eventual destruction in an unfortunate house fire.
Heinlein is a grand master in science fiction, and indeed in literature. His best works such as STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND and THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS hold up not only as classic sci-fi, but classics in literature. Even his lesser efforts have been nothing if not fun; THE PUPPET MASTERS is an oft-imitated piece of paranoia, STARSHIP TROOPERS is a great, goofy, right-wing, ridiculous wartime auctioneer, and THE DOOR INTO SUMMER is a marvelous little time-travel love story.
There is consensus, however, that his later works lack the bite and sparkle of his early successes. Yet even in the autumn of his career, after suffering a stroke, he still managed to write clever fictions: FRIDAY is a non-stop auctioneer that harkens back to his earlier pop fictions, and JOB: A COMEDY OF JUSTICE, if overlong and prone to bouts of speechifying, is an intellectual workout.
But NUMBER OF THE BEAST is abominable, a failure at every level. Generally considered with good cause to be his worst novel, it is an indulgent, gangly, and hopeless mess, an amalgam of every one of Heinlein’s worst tendencies.
The plot involves four hyper-intelligent and deeply over-sexed geniuses who, on the run from some undefined alien entity, jump from time to time and universe to universe in a souped-up wondercar named Gay Deceiver. Along the way, they break through several imaginary barriers, spending time with Glinda the Good Witch in Oz, as well as other fantastic landscapes better left in the books they came from. And at all times, the four engage in bizarre and amateurish dialogue that reads as the ramblings of Dan Brown on his worst day. And that’s saying something. The Hardy Boys would have quit their detective duties and gone into exile if they were forced to recite dialogue this inane.
Here’s a typical example (and remember, such dialogue goes on for pages):
Our men came back looking cheerful, with Zebbie carrying Jacob’s rifle and wearing Jacob’s pistol. Zebbie gave me a big grin. “Cap’n, there wasn’t a durn thing wrong with me that Carter’s Little Liver Pills couldn’t have fixed. Now I’m right.”
“Good.”
“But just barely,” agreed my husband. “Hilda – Captain Hilda my beloved – your complex schedule almost caused me to have a childish accident.”
“I think that unnecessary discussion wasted more time than did my schedule. As may be, Jacob, I would rather have to clean up a ‘childish accident’ than have to bury you.”
“But-”
“Drop the matter!”
“Pop, you had better believe it!” sang out Deety.
Jacob looked startled (and hurt, and I felt the hurt). Zebbie looked sharply at me, no longer grinning. He said nothing, went to Deety, reached for his rifle. “I’ll take that, hon.”
Deety held it away from him. “The Captain has not relieved me.”
“Oh. Okay, we’ll do it by the book.” Zebbie looked at me. “Captain, I thoroughly approve of your doctrine of continuous guard; I was too slack.”
And on, and on, and on, and on, until the reader is screaming at all four of them to shut up! As the annoying quartet continue to quarrel amongst themselves as to the correct mode of discipline, all the while throwing around asides and quips that would make Henry Youngman ashamed along with technobabble that reads like a quantum mechanic instruction manual, it is all one can do to focus on the page rather than do something more constructive, such as start a bonfire with the pages so as to have the book fulfill some useful purpose.
Some have said that such writing on Heinlein’s part was intentional; that the novel is not in itself badly written, but that it is in fact a parody of bad writing. THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST, then, is a massive in-joke on Heinlein’s part, a text on how NOT to write a novel.
Fair enough, but such a theory reeks of desperation. Some people cannot fathom that a writer may simply release a bad novel, and will do anything to justify its existence rather than admit that Heinlein failed spectacularly.
But if the reverse is true, and Heinlein meant all the poor dialogue and whisper-thin characterization as a joke, let me be the first to advocate that a joke only goes so far, and that 500+ pages of bad writing, however intentioned, is a chore to read. THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST is poor, poor, poor. It sullies Heinlein’s reputation, even as he sullies himself with self- indulgent references to his own better works. He even puts down STRANGER, the one novel that will outlive them all, and deservedly so. Heinlein, whatever his intentions, wrote a horrible, horrible novel. No editor in the world could have fixed this.
Certainly, the literary world is rife with examples of acclaimed authors who fail, at various times in their lives, to meet expectations. Is there any Ernest Hemingway novel more
Show More
disappointing than ISLANDS IN THE STREAM? Should Joseph Heller really have written CLOSING TIME? Has Nicholson Baker destroyed his career with CHECKPOINT? Add to the list of the ignoble this entry: Robert A. Heinlein should never, NEVER have written THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST. It should have remained locked away in a file drawer somewhere, gathering dust, and consigned to eventual destruction in an unfortunate house fire.
Heinlein is a grand master in science fiction, and indeed in literature. His best works such as STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND and THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS hold up not only as classic sci-fi, but classics in literature. Even his lesser efforts have been nothing if not fun; THE PUPPET MASTERS is an oft-imitated piece of paranoia, STARSHIP TROOPERS is a great, goofy, right-wing, ridiculous wartime auctioneer, and THE DOOR INTO SUMMER is a marvelous little time-travel love story.
There is consensus, however, that his later works lack the bite and sparkle of his early successes. Yet even in the autumn of his career, after suffering a stroke, he still managed to write clever fictions: FRIDAY is a non-stop auctioneer that harkens back to his earlier pop fictions, and JOB: A COMEDY OF JUSTICE, if overlong and prone to bouts of speechifying, is an intellectual workout.
But NUMBER OF THE BEAST is abominable, a failure at every level. Generally considered with good cause to be his worst novel, it is an indulgent, gangly, and hopeless mess, an amalgam of every one of Heinlein’s worst tendencies.
The plot involves four hyper-intelligent and deeply over-sexed geniuses who, on the run from some undefined alien entity, jump from time to time and universe to universe in a souped-up wondercar named Gay Deceiver. Along the way, they break through several imaginary barriers, spending time with Glinda the Good Witch in Oz, as well as other fantastic landscapes better left in the books they came from. And at all times, the four engage in bizarre and amateurish dialogue that reads as the ramblings of Dan Brown on his worst day. And that’s saying something. The Hardy Boys would have quit their detective duties and gone into exile if they were forced to recite dialogue this inane.
Here’s a typical example (and remember, such dialogue goes on for pages):
Our men came back looking cheerful, with Zebbie carrying Jacob’s rifle and wearing Jacob’s pistol. Zebbie gave me a big grin. “Cap’n, there wasn’t a durn thing wrong with me that Carter’s Little Liver Pills couldn’t have fixed. Now I’m right.”
“Good.”
“But just barely,” agreed my husband. “Hilda – Captain Hilda my beloved – your complex schedule almost caused me to have a childish accident.”
“I think that unnecessary discussion wasted more time than did my schedule. As may be, Jacob, I would rather have to clean up a ‘childish accident’ than have to bury you.”
“But-”
“Drop the matter!”
“Pop, you had better believe it!” sang out Deety.
Jacob looked startled (and hurt, and I felt the hurt). Zebbie looked sharply at me, no longer grinning. He said nothing, went to Deety, reached for his rifle. “I’ll take that, hon.”
Deety held it away from him. “The Captain has not relieved me.”
“Oh. Okay, we’ll do it by the book.” Zebbie looked at me. “Captain, I thoroughly approve of your doctrine of continuous guard; I was too slack.”
And on, and on, and on, and on, until the reader is screaming at all four of them to shut up! As the annoying quartet continue to quarrel amongst themselves as to the correct mode of discipline, all the while throwing around asides and quips that would make Henry Youngman ashamed along with technobabble that reads like a quantum mechanic instruction manual, it is all one can do to focus on the page rather than do something more constructive, such as start a bonfire with the pages so as to have the book fulfill some useful purpose.
Some have said that such writing on Heinlein’s part was intentional; that the novel is not in itself badly written, but that it is in fact a parody of bad writing. THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST, then, is a massive in-joke on Heinlein’s part, a text on how NOT to write a novel.
Fair enough, but such a theory reeks of desperation. Some people cannot fathom that a writer may simply release a bad novel, and will do anything to justify its existence rather than admit that Heinlein failed spectacularly.
But if the reverse is true, and Heinlein meant all the poor dialogue and whisper-thin characterization as a joke, let me be the first to advocate that a joke only goes so far, and that 500+ pages of bad writing, however intentioned, is a chore to read. THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST is poor, poor, poor. It sullies Heinlein’s reputation, even as he sullies himself with self- indulgent references to his own better works. He even puts down STRANGER, the one novel that will outlive them all, and deservedly so. Heinlein, whatever his intentions, wrote a horrible, horrible novel. No editor in the world could have fixed this.
Show Less
LibraryThing member EmScape
WARNING: Do not read this book until you have read Heinlein’s Time Enough For Love, Revolt in 2100, Methuselah’s Children, Stranger in a Strange Land, Glory Road, Podkayne of Mars,and The Rolling Stones. You should also have at least a familiarity with The Land of Oz, Edgar Rice Burroughs’
During the last years of his life, it seems Heinlein had a desire to gather the characters he and others had written over the years to attend a conference. So, he set about devising a way to make that happen. This book is the result. Four scientists have invented a “continua device” that allows for travel through time, space, and “fictional” worlds.
These are very Heinlein-esque characters, so if you hold strong sexual taboos, or disagree with his philosophy as a whole, you will probably not enjoy reading this very much. If you are a Heinlein fan, this book (and its sequels) is/are the ultimate payoff.
Show More
Mars series, and Wonderland. Fans of Science Fiction from the 1940’s to 1980’s will be most capapble of enjoying the work in its entirety.During the last years of his life, it seems Heinlein had a desire to gather the characters he and others had written over the years to attend a conference. So, he set about devising a way to make that happen. This book is the result. Four scientists have invented a “continua device” that allows for travel through time, space, and “fictional” worlds.
These are very Heinlein-esque characters, so if you hold strong sexual taboos, or disagree with his philosophy as a whole, you will probably not enjoy reading this very much. If you are a Heinlein fan, this book (and its sequels) is/are the ultimate payoff.
Show Less
LibraryThing member aethercowboy
I must admit: this book was my first experience with Heinlein. I had never read anything of his before that. Part of what drove me to read it was that I had heard all of my sci-fi reader peers say that Heinlein was "amazing" or their "favorite author" or some other such laudatory comments. Another
I dare say, true fans of Heinlein will not like the conclusion I have come to: I did not fully enjoy this book. Maybe I need to read every other Heinlein book first, or maybe I just read one of the "bad" Heinlein books, or maybe the neap tide was happening and that affected my enjoyment, or one of a million other reasons. The fact of the matter is, I did not enjoy the book.
I loved the fact that it was crossover fiction. If you were to see my bookshelf, you would see several examples of crossover fiction. So, it's not the fact that it was discombobulated.
I think it was the way people talked. I'm not sure if it was how people talked "back then," when Heinlein wrote it (back in the '80s... you know, the 1980s). I find it hard to believe that anybody in the future would feel the need to make a distinction between the '90s and the Gay '90s, or that anybody would actually know what the Gay '90s was, unless they took a modern history class recently.
I'm convinced that it was entirely the dialogue that turned me off to the book. And it's strange, too, as the dialogue in Asimov's stuff didn't set me off to it, and his characters made very large segues into things like economics or physics or one of the other billion of topics Asimov knew vividly.
Maybe it was just too danged uncharacteristic, or maybe everybody talked too much. Maybe it felt as if every single aspect of the book had to be qualified. Oh, Deety has an internal clock? Great! We don't need to hear about it every few pages. Stuff like that. Also, what's up with them playing dress-up all the danged time? "Let's go to Mars! But first, let's dress up like were in an ERB novel! Whee!"
I guess I would have enjoyed it better if they actually had more believable dialogue, and less dialogue at that. And would have actually done things to move the plot. There were some interesting tidbits in the book, but not enough for me to consider it a favorite, or even one that I greatly enjoyed.
You may like it if you're a die hard Heinlein fan. But if you are a die hard Heinlein fan, wouldn't you have already read it?
Show More
part was the fact that I am a die hard Wizard of Oz fan, and make it a point to read as much as I can with respect to the whole Oz mythos. The third, and quite possibly the strongest part, was that my economics teacher in high school gave me the book, and it had been sitting on my shelf until I finally picked it up and read it.I dare say, true fans of Heinlein will not like the conclusion I have come to: I did not fully enjoy this book. Maybe I need to read every other Heinlein book first, or maybe I just read one of the "bad" Heinlein books, or maybe the neap tide was happening and that affected my enjoyment, or one of a million other reasons. The fact of the matter is, I did not enjoy the book.
I loved the fact that it was crossover fiction. If you were to see my bookshelf, you would see several examples of crossover fiction. So, it's not the fact that it was discombobulated.
I think it was the way people talked. I'm not sure if it was how people talked "back then," when Heinlein wrote it (back in the '80s... you know, the 1980s). I find it hard to believe that anybody in the future would feel the need to make a distinction between the '90s and the Gay '90s, or that anybody would actually know what the Gay '90s was, unless they took a modern history class recently.
I'm convinced that it was entirely the dialogue that turned me off to the book. And it's strange, too, as the dialogue in Asimov's stuff didn't set me off to it, and his characters made very large segues into things like economics or physics or one of the other billion of topics Asimov knew vividly.
Maybe it was just too danged uncharacteristic, or maybe everybody talked too much. Maybe it felt as if every single aspect of the book had to be qualified. Oh, Deety has an internal clock? Great! We don't need to hear about it every few pages. Stuff like that. Also, what's up with them playing dress-up all the danged time? "Let's go to Mars! But first, let's dress up like were in an ERB novel! Whee!"
I guess I would have enjoyed it better if they actually had more believable dialogue, and less dialogue at that. And would have actually done things to move the plot. There were some interesting tidbits in the book, but not enough for me to consider it a favorite, or even one that I greatly enjoyed.
You may like it if you're a die hard Heinlein fan. But if you are a die hard Heinlein fan, wouldn't you have already read it?
Show Less
LibraryThing member antao
(Original Review, 1980-08-31)
Robert Heinlein's agent had hoped to get $1 million for his latest novel, "The Number of the Beast." What he had to settle for was half that, and not from his accustomed publisher nor from any of the houses with heavy SF publishing programs. The U.S. book rights went to
It was all a joke on the reader. Well, you “pays” your money and you “gets” your laughs, all the way from the bank.
Forget about the fleeting references to other works (like references to "Dune" in Varley's 'Titan') -- this book not only manages to make references to Star Trek, the Lensman series, Alice in Wonderland, the Land of Oz, Stranger in a Strange Land [and Heinlein trashes himself here by saying, "'My God, the things some writers will do for money!'"], Known Space, the Foundation Series, Poul Anderson, SF critics. I think this wins the prize. Since the book is about 90% conversation, it is probably only for die-hard Heinlein fans like myself....And there are some weird/ illustrations in the trade-paperback...
NUMBER OF THE BEAST (NOTB) is poor writing for all the reasons given in this network before, but it is not sexist and I can prove it. The second theme of NOTB is not "the problems of command", but the inability of some men (otherwise able) to accept that a women can be the best in what they have been brought up to believe is "man's" work. It is this theme that is unresolved (Jake thinks he's in line, but he still has and is a problem). Lazarus and Zeb have adapted: one by resolving to avoid Sharpie except where the situation is limited by acquaintance to acquaintance protocol, and the other by accepting her leadership. Jake hasn't done either. The men also get their ears pinned back over who's going to do what once the children are born - they're not going to get to leave the women and children home. Heinlein can't resolve these problems short of making them all Howards and Howards have all the time they need for all the activities they want (i.e., time enough for screwing around and time enough for love). It's because he isn't a sexist (*) that:
1) He raises these ideas;
2) Can’t resolve them.
Enough of flaming (really), but does anyone know what "floccinaucinihilipilificatrix" [2018 EDIT: I still don't know what it means...] is supposed to mean (NOTB p. 134).
I have read the British version which came out in hardback a month or two ago. I have seen plenty of copies of the American trade paperback version at the (non) local bookstore so I guess it is out for real now. The American version was apparently edited down by on the order of 100 pages. This is widely considered not to be much of a loss.
The book, in a word, is "uncontrolled". Basically Heinlein didn't exercise much control at all about what he wrote. There is a story-line. There is characterization. There is adventure. But there are also long diatribes about such varied topics as: women’s rights, wifely duties, husbandly duties, responsibilities of a military commander and the like. The same themes and points of view as come out in most of his books particularly "Time Enough for Love".
As for you fans of books that reference other books this one has it in spades. It is partly contrived like as though he heard this discussion on this BBS and decided to write a book that would reference lots of other SF books. On the whole I enjoyed it but several friends of mine did not finish it, perhaps I'm incurable but there are presumably quite a few incurable Heinlein fans out there so I'm not alone.
Note (*). The author of Podkayne, and Glory Road? Is anybody going to claim that Star isn't the BOSS in Road? Isn't Heinlein the one who put adventure in adventuress? So I sprang the question to a female friend of mine over lunch at the school cafeteria. Mark me down for an MCP if you want (and I didn't think I had it in me).
Me: Heinlein; sexist??!
Her: She says "Chomp, chomp, Yes, I think so."
Me: "But, but, but, why?", sez I.
Her: "All his women get pregnant first thing in his recent books"
Me: Silence.
And this from a future female mathematician who wanted to become eagerly pregnant, with my very reluctant cooperation, after finishing high-school and university..
So I accept the gauntlet. RAH's recent women get pregnant quickly because he's trying to get it into some thick skulls out there that a society or family that doesn't think that an 8 month pregnant women is the most beautiful sight around (so to speak), has just about joined the dinosaurs. Of course if women find it too much of an inconvenience to bear children (I personally think it’s an inconvenience to even help raise them; 2018 EDIT: little did I know I would raise three children in the long future!) and if our society makes it clear (and it most certainly does) that having children is a crushing burden to our instant gratification, consumer and "me" oriented ethic, then our ethics are counter-survival.
[2018 EDIT: As Schlafly would say if she were a man, "I have my now wife's permission to write this".]
[2018 EDIT: This review was written at the time as I was running my own personal BBS server. Much of the language of this and other reviews written in 1980 reflect a very particular kind of language: what I call now in retrospect a “BBS language”.]
Robert Heinlein's agent had hoped to get $1 million for his latest novel, "The Number of the Beast." What he had to settle for was half that, and not from his accustomed publisher nor from any of the houses with heavy SF publishing programs. The U.S. book rights went to
Show More
Fawcett Columbine, and the resulting trade paperback is $6.95 per copy. Is it worth it? Very likely not. It's full of science fiction community in-jokes. Its payoff depends heavily on your being able to recognize not only the bylines, but also the principal characters and personalities of a fair number of other science fiction writers. No casual reader or newcomer to SF can possibly hope to understand what's going on; taken simply as a narrative reading experience, it's at best inconclusive and frustrating. It begins in Heinlein's classic action mode of the 1940s and early '50s. It has the expectable utterly competent hero in deadly peril as the result of an attack on the world's entire social system. The explicit promise to the reader is that the hero will, as he always has, solve his personal problem by saving the world. But the hero has access to a machine that lets him shift out of this reality into any other reality-including fictional realities. So he slips into the Land of Oz, into E. E. Smith's classic "Galactic Patrol" sci-fi series, and then into Heinlein's own "Lazarus Long" series. The deadly peril is swiftly forgotten. A major purpose of this shifting seems to be to allow everyone to make love to everyone else…sometimes expanding these possibilities by having the characters undergo sex changes. This latter feature is very much in keeping with the "new" Heinlein who appeared in the late 1950s, when the back half of "Stranger in a Strange Land" suddenly became like nothing so much as a talky Jack Woodford novel. This new Heinlein is sometimes on, sometimes off, setting up extended socio-philosophical dialogues against rudimentary action backgrounds. Never has he been as excessively verbal as he is in Number, or as prone to killing a point after it's been made. Finally, Heinlein simply throws a party; a vast, rip-roaring fantasy assemblage to which he "invites" those writers for whom he has developed a personal affinity as a member of the West Coast science fiction community. At that party, we are told incidentally that the hero and the world were never in any sort of peril at all.It was all a joke on the reader. Well, you “pays” your money and you “gets” your laughs, all the way from the bank.
Forget about the fleeting references to other works (like references to "Dune" in Varley's 'Titan') -- this book not only manages to make references to Star Trek, the Lensman series, Alice in Wonderland, the Land of Oz, Stranger in a Strange Land [and Heinlein trashes himself here by saying, "'My God, the things some writers will do for money!'"], Known Space, the Foundation Series, Poul Anderson, SF critics. I think this wins the prize. Since the book is about 90% conversation, it is probably only for die-hard Heinlein fans like myself....And there are some weird/ illustrations in the trade-paperback...
NUMBER OF THE BEAST (NOTB) is poor writing for all the reasons given in this network before, but it is not sexist and I can prove it. The second theme of NOTB is not "the problems of command", but the inability of some men (otherwise able) to accept that a women can be the best in what they have been brought up to believe is "man's" work. It is this theme that is unresolved (Jake thinks he's in line, but he still has and is a problem). Lazarus and Zeb have adapted: one by resolving to avoid Sharpie except where the situation is limited by acquaintance to acquaintance protocol, and the other by accepting her leadership. Jake hasn't done either. The men also get their ears pinned back over who's going to do what once the children are born - they're not going to get to leave the women and children home. Heinlein can't resolve these problems short of making them all Howards and Howards have all the time they need for all the activities they want (i.e., time enough for screwing around and time enough for love). It's because he isn't a sexist (*) that:
1) He raises these ideas;
2) Can’t resolve them.
Enough of flaming (really), but does anyone know what "floccinaucinihilipilificatrix" [2018 EDIT: I still don't know what it means...] is supposed to mean (NOTB p. 134).
I have read the British version which came out in hardback a month or two ago. I have seen plenty of copies of the American trade paperback version at the (non) local bookstore so I guess it is out for real now. The American version was apparently edited down by on the order of 100 pages. This is widely considered not to be much of a loss.
The book, in a word, is "uncontrolled". Basically Heinlein didn't exercise much control at all about what he wrote. There is a story-line. There is characterization. There is adventure. But there are also long diatribes about such varied topics as: women’s rights, wifely duties, husbandly duties, responsibilities of a military commander and the like. The same themes and points of view as come out in most of his books particularly "Time Enough for Love".
As for you fans of books that reference other books this one has it in spades. It is partly contrived like as though he heard this discussion on this BBS and decided to write a book that would reference lots of other SF books. On the whole I enjoyed it but several friends of mine did not finish it, perhaps I'm incurable but there are presumably quite a few incurable Heinlein fans out there so I'm not alone.
Note (*). The author of Podkayne, and Glory Road? Is anybody going to claim that Star isn't the BOSS in Road? Isn't Heinlein the one who put adventure in adventuress? So I sprang the question to a female friend of mine over lunch at the school cafeteria. Mark me down for an MCP if you want (and I didn't think I had it in me).
Me: Heinlein; sexist??!
Her: She says "Chomp, chomp, Yes, I think so."
Me: "But, but, but, why?", sez I.
Her: "All his women get pregnant first thing in his recent books"
Me: Silence.
And this from a future female mathematician who wanted to become eagerly pregnant, with my very reluctant cooperation, after finishing high-school and university..
So I accept the gauntlet. RAH's recent women get pregnant quickly because he's trying to get it into some thick skulls out there that a society or family that doesn't think that an 8 month pregnant women is the most beautiful sight around (so to speak), has just about joined the dinosaurs. Of course if women find it too much of an inconvenience to bear children (I personally think it’s an inconvenience to even help raise them; 2018 EDIT: little did I know I would raise three children in the long future!) and if our society makes it clear (and it most certainly does) that having children is a crushing burden to our instant gratification, consumer and "me" oriented ethic, then our ethics are counter-survival.
[2018 EDIT: As Schlafly would say if she were a man, "I have my now wife's permission to write this".]
[2018 EDIT: This review was written at the time as I was running my own personal BBS server. Much of the language of this and other reviews written in 1980 reflect a very particular kind of language: what I call now in retrospect a “BBS language”.]
Show Less
LibraryThing member JayInAmes
Could not stay interested, book was meandering all over the place. Not a good representation of the work of Robert A. Heinlein.
LibraryThing member 5hrdrive
Heinlein comes up with a terrific idea for a "continua" machine, able to instantaneously transit to any time or place. He then proceeds to go absolutely nowhere with the idea. Honestly, for 511 pages nothing happens! Well, actually everyone gets upset at everyone else (repeatedly) and then a big
Show More
deal is made over kissing and making up, over and over, etc., ad nauseum. Would have made a mildly entertaining 150 page novella, but this is a mess. Show Less
LibraryThing member tdrumhel
Good start, awful ending.
LibraryThing member joeldinda
Painful to (re)read. Some more or less random comments follow.
At one level this book's an adventure story, but it's pretty incoherent--just a bunch of episodes, for the most part. A couple are pretty good; especially the bit set in Oz.
It's also a parallel universe story. The framework's decently
At another level this is an exploration of the difference between fiction/imagination and reality. At this it's a failure. While Heinlein seems to have thought he was exploring some sort of intellectual exercise, there really wasn't enough there to sustain it.
And: The shifting viewpoints don't work. There are four main narrators; most of the time I couldn't tell which one was speaking.
Then Laz Long (Woodie Smith; Ted Bronson) shows up and things completely fall apart. I generally like Lazarus Long, except in this book.
I did have fun noticing that the car had a remote starter and built-in navigation (named Gay, who's a Good Girl); that the book predicted genetic genealogy, and similar things. But that's really a poor reason to read old SF.
Anyway, didn't like it any better this week than I liked it forty years ago.
At one level this book's an adventure story, but it's pretty incoherent--just a bunch of episodes, for the most part. A couple are pretty good; especially the bit set in Oz.
It's also a parallel universe story. The framework's decently
Show More
presented, but the story itself's mostly a failure (as noted above).At another level this is an exploration of the difference between fiction/imagination and reality. At this it's a failure. While Heinlein seems to have thought he was exploring some sort of intellectual exercise, there really wasn't enough there to sustain it.
And: The shifting viewpoints don't work. There are four main narrators; most of the time I couldn't tell which one was speaking.
Then Laz Long (Woodie Smith; Ted Bronson) shows up and things completely fall apart. I generally like Lazarus Long, except in this book.
I did have fun noticing that the car had a remote starter and built-in navigation (named Gay, who's a Good Girl); that the book predicted genetic genealogy, and similar things. But that's really a poor reason to read old SF.
Anyway, didn't like it any better this week than I liked it forty years ago.
Show Less
LibraryThing member mpierce11964
I've read this book at least three times over the last 10 years and I always comes dow to a strong begining, where it suck you in and seems to be going somewhere. The hoping around to other planets or realities is very interesting and makes the storyline more enjoyable. In the last part of the book
Show More
the story seems to loose direction and the basic plot. Many questions are never answered. Show Less
LibraryThing member Kellswitch
I've always enjoyed this one more for the ideas than the actualization of them. I like the idea of the different worlds in fiction having their own universes and being real.
However, the witting is rather sad, the dialog can be abysmal and his views on sex....well, off putting is one word that
My family have always categorized Heinlein as having three periods of writing, his Boyscout Period (Space Cadet), his Good Period (The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress) and is Insane Period, (I Will Fear No Evil and on), though there is some debate about Friday.
I would recommend this book to Heinlein fans or completists, or someone who can read a book f and enjoy it for the ideas alone vs. quality writing and entertainment.
However, the witting is rather sad, the dialog can be abysmal and his views on sex....well, off putting is one word that
Show More
works. I read this as a teen and found it very confusing and a bit disturbing, but not enough to not read it.My family have always categorized Heinlein as having three periods of writing, his Boyscout Period (Space Cadet), his Good Period (The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress) and is Insane Period, (I Will Fear No Evil and on), though there is some debate about Friday.
I would recommend this book to Heinlein fans or completists, or someone who can read a book f and enjoy it for the ideas alone vs. quality writing and entertainment.
Show Less
LibraryThing member thomasJamo
This book is a little different. It starts out as a space adventure in a airplane/car equipped with an n-space interdimensional transporter device. This is the book that first introduces Heinlein's Pentheistic Solipsism / World as Myth story arc. It is a crucial read if you enjoy the Lazarus Long
Show More
books even though Lazarus Long doesn't actually appear until the last couple hundred pages. But it is crucial to the Lazarus Long story line. Show Less
LibraryThing member Audacity88
Heinlein's dialogue is always rather poor; his characters appear to take delight without end in snidishness. Partway through The Number of the Beast, I'm putting it down. Though curious as to how Heinlein connects the worlds of L. Frank Baum and Edgar Rice Burroughs with his own, I am put off by
Show More
the conversational inanity - enough that continuing reading is more of a chore than a pleasure. Show Less
LibraryThing member rakerman
This is when Heinlein started to flake out, as he built a grand design to unify all his books, as some other SF authors have attempted. This one was passable, everything else that came after in this series (The Cat Who Walks Through Walls, To Sail Beyond the Sunset) was total garbage.
LibraryThing member shelley582
very zany - you either like this one or hate it.
LibraryThing member Unreachableshelf
Not among my very favorite of Heinlein's books, I still found this to be an enjoyable read. It does fall apart a little during the last section, L'Envoi, and I spent a lot of time wanting to throw something heavy at Jacob for repeatedly deciding that he was being an idiot and planning to reform
Show More
while never doing it. However it does feature several sentient computers, one of the things Heinlein does best, and is rather reminiscient of Time Enough for Love even before the Longs show up. Fans of that segment of Heinlein's work should enjoy it. Show Less
LibraryThing member wbf2
I managed to read the whole thing only out of continual amazement that an author generally as good as Heinlein could put out such a piece of dritt. Long boring sections, characters registering "fear"by saying things like "I'm scared", and a final descent into solopistic and irrelevant confusion.
LibraryThing member sf_addict
I got tired of the sickly sweet dialogue and dull story in this book.
I was looking forward to reading this and it started off quite pleasantly, I was enjoying the story, such as it was, but then it got dull, quickly, that is about a third of the way in, and its a 500+ page book-drop this on your
Basically a scientist invents a dimension jumping machine cum time machine, based around an old Ford car, and he comes up with a theory of the number of universes based on the number 6 raised to the power of 6, 6 times - 6 6 6. A group is assembled, a kind of family group, off on their jollies, but I began to find the characters incredibly annoying and twee. I hate that word twee, its such a, well, twee word, but it is quite apt with this book, apart from its size! "Oh John I SO love you, youre such a remarkable man, my hero, Daddy will be happy to have you as a son" If thats not bad enough the young lady is known as DT, which I discover is short for Deja Thoris. Anyone who has read Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom books will know that name! But also her erstwhile husband just happens to be called John Carter. And guess what planet they land on-its red and ends in 'ars'! For Christ's sake, could it get any more twee? Its like eating a really sweet candy bar, so sweet it makes your teeth itch!
Enough was enough, life is too short etc
Moving on.....
I was looking forward to reading this and it started off quite pleasantly, I was enjoying the story, such as it was, but then it got dull, quickly, that is about a third of the way in, and its a 500+ page book-drop this on your
Show More
toe and you'll be hopping round the room!Basically a scientist invents a dimension jumping machine cum time machine, based around an old Ford car, and he comes up with a theory of the number of universes based on the number 6 raised to the power of 6, 6 times - 6 6 6. A group is assembled, a kind of family group, off on their jollies, but I began to find the characters incredibly annoying and twee. I hate that word twee, its such a, well, twee word, but it is quite apt with this book, apart from its size! "Oh John I SO love you, youre such a remarkable man, my hero, Daddy will be happy to have you as a son" If thats not bad enough the young lady is known as DT, which I discover is short for Deja Thoris. Anyone who has read Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom books will know that name! But also her erstwhile husband just happens to be called John Carter. And guess what planet they land on-its red and ends in 'ars'! For Christ's sake, could it get any more twee? Its like eating a really sweet candy bar, so sweet it makes your teeth itch!
Enough was enough, life is too short etc
Moving on.....
Show Less
LibraryThing member esperanto41
One of Heinlein's very best. Two husband-wife teams pilot a computer-controlled time-machine into multi-dimensional universe. Like most RAH books, plot is haphazard at best, but the scenic route is breathtaking. I especially enjoyed the increasingly sophisticated oral "programming" given to the
Show More
semi-sentient computer as it flies the voyagers into alternate universes. (Because this book revisits many Heinlein characters and themes from earlier works, new readers should start with STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND or TIME ENOUGH FOR LOVE.) Show Less
LibraryThing member Archmage
Ok, I have only half read it. One of the few books I have picked up that I have been unable to finish. There are some good ideas in there, but at the time I just couldn't get past the writing and the characters to appreciate them.
LibraryThing member Fledgist
Heinlein shoves as much as possible into the gallimaufry of a story.
LibraryThing member PMaranci
I feel very conflicted about this book. It's one of the ones that I've re-read every year or two; it's large, and once you start it it's very hard to put down. Heinlein, whatever his faults, was a storyteller - and a gripping one.
But his faults are largely on display in this book.
When I was a young
But that damned Heinlein really WAS talented. Witness the fact that I've read the book more than ten times in the past couple of decades.
The flaws are many? He gets really creepy on the sex. The "old man Heinlein" voice is particularly noticable - it's a bit jarring and weird for everyone to banter and quip like someone from Kansas City in the 1930s. The incest angle gets really sickening, to be honest - why does he glory in it in so many books? I have to wonder.
And towards the end the whole thing basically falls apart. I'll avoid spoiling it, but basically reality sort of falls apart and things just get weird. There are lots and lots (and lots and lots) of obvious in-jokes, some of which I get, and some of which I don't. That gets old and tired after a while. I'll also say that there's something of a loss in the book; it starts out first-person in the voice of one protagonist, but then starts rotating between viewpoints in each chapter. Towards the end, when the original lead is "speaking", it feels as if he's somehow lost. They're all just merging into a single Heinleinian superman/woman.
Which reminds me of a parody of Heinlein that my teen-aged self wanted to write, come to think of it. His later characters are all sex maniacs, and all act, think, and talk the same - like an idealized Heinlein, I presume. If he hadn't had a gift for storytelling on a par with that of Rudyard Kipling, he would never have gotten away with it.
I've gone back and forth on this book. I hated it the first time I read it (shortly after it was first published), warmed up to it again...and now, decades later, I find myself more repulsed by the sex and incest angles than I used to be. Maybe I'm just getting old. Nonetheless, I'll likely end up reading the book again in another year or three.
But his faults are largely on display in this book.
When I was a young
Show More
teen, my brother and I used to torture each other by reading particularly ripe and painful passages out loud to each other. This book, and the "Notebooks of Lazarus Long" excerpts from Time Enough For Love, comprised our list of pain. They were truly retch-inducing.But that damned Heinlein really WAS talented. Witness the fact that I've read the book more than ten times in the past couple of decades.
The flaws are many? He gets really creepy on the sex. The "old man Heinlein" voice is particularly noticable - it's a bit jarring and weird for everyone to banter and quip like someone from Kansas City in the 1930s. The incest angle gets really sickening, to be honest - why does he glory in it in so many books? I have to wonder.
And towards the end the whole thing basically falls apart. I'll avoid spoiling it, but basically reality sort of falls apart and things just get weird. There are lots and lots (and lots and lots) of obvious in-jokes, some of which I get, and some of which I don't. That gets old and tired after a while. I'll also say that there's something of a loss in the book; it starts out first-person in the voice of one protagonist, but then starts rotating between viewpoints in each chapter. Towards the end, when the original lead is "speaking", it feels as if he's somehow lost. They're all just merging into a single Heinleinian superman/woman.
Which reminds me of a parody of Heinlein that my teen-aged self wanted to write, come to think of it. His later characters are all sex maniacs, and all act, think, and talk the same - like an idealized Heinlein, I presume. If he hadn't had a gift for storytelling on a par with that of Rudyard Kipling, he would never have gotten away with it.
I've gone back and forth on this book. I hated it the first time I read it (shortly after it was first published), warmed up to it again...and now, decades later, I find myself more repulsed by the sex and incest angles than I used to be. Maybe I'm just getting old. Nonetheless, I'll likely end up reading the book again in another year or three.
Show Less
LibraryThing member szarka
You'll probably enjoy this book more if you're already a Heinlein fan, or at least conversant with classic scifi. Not his best, but it does have its charms. (I've always wondered whether the creator of the TV series Sliders read this one.)
LibraryThing member chellerystick
My spouse urged me to read this as his favorite Heinlein.
It was tedious going. The characters are all annoying, constantly trying to one-up each other and then dropping into purple rants about how much they love each other and/or would like to have sex with each other. It feels like a student
The only thing that kept me going was the hope for more plot and/or world-building. I think Heinlein is an ideas guy, not a dialogue guy. But after the big moment, about 2/3 of the way into the book, there was not much more to offer. It turns out that this revelation is a large portion of what my spouse loves about the book. The book has an interesting premise, as I said over and over; but that is not enough to sustain the novel. A short story, perhaps, and then the rest could be up to your own imagination.
Note that the only other Heinlein I have read is Stranger in a Strange Land, about ten years ago, so this was not a reunion tour for me, either.
It was tedious going. The characters are all annoying, constantly trying to one-up each other and then dropping into purple rants about how much they love each other and/or would like to have sex with each other. It feels like a student
Show More
movie. The characters are flat and unmotivated and far too similar to each other. Even though they are constantly narrating, you can't get inside their heads. One gets the feeling that they are all either terribly shallow or that everything they say is only for show, or, even worse, to be a mouthpiece for the author. Tell by showing, for crying out loud.The only thing that kept me going was the hope for more plot and/or world-building. I think Heinlein is an ideas guy, not a dialogue guy. But after the big moment, about 2/3 of the way into the book, there was not much more to offer. It turns out that this revelation is a large portion of what my spouse loves about the book. The book has an interesting premise, as I said over and over; but that is not enough to sustain the novel. A short story, perhaps, and then the rest could be up to your own imagination.
Note that the only other Heinlein I have read is Stranger in a Strange Land, about ten years ago, so this was not a reunion tour for me, either.
Show Less
LibraryThing member octoberdad
The Gay Deceiver is hands down the coolest ship ever constructed. As the genesis of Heinlein's concept of pantheistic solipsism, this book isn't too shabby either. While the "journey to new universe, explore, get into trouble, escape--wash-rinse-repeat" cycle gets a little tedious in a few spots,
Show More
Heinlein's imagination and ability to keep you engaged is definitely worth the read. Show Less
LibraryThing member Andy_DiMartino
Had to re-read this alongside it's parallel book "The Pursuit of the Pankera" just for comparison sake. Found that I enjoyed this one more as it seems more in-depth.
Awards
Locus Award (Nominee — Science Fiction Novel — 1981)
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
1980
Physical description
511 p.
ISBN
0449900193 / 9780449900192
Local notes
Last page detached.