Post by: Fly320s on December 01, 2005, 05:51:21 AM
I don't grok it. I enjoyed the first half of the book as a little bit goofy sci-fi story. The second half left me scratching my head and wondering what Heinlein was trying to say. It seems to me that the story went off on a tangent about religion.
Anyone care to enlighten me?
I like Heinlein's writing style, so I'll read another one of his books. Maybe I can grok one of those.
Post by: El Tejon on December 01, 2005, 06:35:56 AM
It is a criticism of Christianity and churches.
I recommend "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress", FWIW.
Front!
Post by: Werewolf on December 01, 2005, 06:46:37 AM
Heinlein doesn't as far as I know question the existence of GOD. He does question the nature of GOD. He absolutely hated the concept of organized religion as a means to commune with or understand GOD.
Post by: Dave Markowitz on December 01, 2005, 07:45:42 AM
Most people agree that LRH won the bet.
Post by: roo_ster on December 01, 2005, 08:05:49 AM
I have read a bunch of his books & IMO, SISL did not measure up the the rest I have read.
Post by: Art Eatman on December 01, 2005, 12:19:54 PM
I read it when it first came out, and a few times since then. Sure, the message is fairly obvious, but I usually don't let that sort of thing bother me.
I guess I've never worried about any deep meanings in a lot of books. If they're enjoyable as novels, fine. Art
Post by: Fly320s on December 01, 2005, 12:36:39 PM
I figured it was mostly a dig at religion, epecially Christianity, I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything.
Dave M., is that statement about the bet true (documented somewhere)?
Post by: Harold Tuttle on December 01, 2005, 02:43:24 PM
Quote
While the often-cited rumor that Hubbard made a bar bet with Robert Heinlein that he could start a cult is almost certainly false, others have claimed direct knowledge that during 1949 Hubbard did make statements to other people that starting a religion would be a good way to make money.
Writer and publisher Lloyd Arthur Eshbach, for example, reported Hubbard saying "I'd like to start a religion. That's where the money is." Writer Theodore Sturgeon reported that Hubbard made a similar statement at the Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society. Likewise, writer Sam Moskowitz reported in an affidavit that during an Eastern Science Fiction Association meeting, Hubbard had said "You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion."
The Church of Scientology denies that Hubbard ever made any such statement, and has sued at least one publisher, the German magazine Stern, for publishing claims that he did (Stern won the lawsuit). Members hold that the truth or falsity of such claims is irrelevant in judging whether the church meets their spiritual needs.
Writer and publisher Lloyd Arthur Eshbach, for example, reported Hubbard saying "I'd like to start a religion. That's where the money is." Writer Theodore Sturgeon reported that Hubbard made a similar statement at the Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society. Likewise, writer Sam Moskowitz reported in an affidavit that during an Eastern Science Fiction Association meeting, Hubbard had said "You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion."
The Church of Scientology denies that Hubbard ever made any such statement, and has sued at least one publisher, the German magazine Stern, for publishing claims that he did (Stern won the lawsuit). Members hold that the truth or falsity of such claims is irrelevant in judging whether the church meets their spiritual needs.
Post by: Strings on December 01, 2005, 04:09:08 PM
Oh, it DOES make more sense if you read it in the original Martian: looses quite a bit in translation... :neener:
Post by: SpookyPistolero on December 01, 2005, 04:51:18 PM
Post by: Strings on December 01, 2005, 05:34:28 PM
Post by: Sindawe on December 01, 2005, 05:42:43 PM
Quote
Go ahead, sue me. I DARE YOU!
after he learns ALL ABOUT the faith.Quote
O you're saying you don' grok "grok"? :neener:
No, he's just not grokked it in fullness yet.
Post by: SpookyPistolero on December 01, 2005, 05:51:45 PM
Post by: Greg Levy on December 01, 2005, 07:34:45 PM
Stranger is not the only time he attacks religion...in Job he has it again. While it seems he is picking on Chistianity a lot, I tend to see it more as an attack on anyone who goes along with the crowd, without researching and forming their own opinion first. He was very big on researching your position rather than doing something on 'faith'.
The scene that sticks with me more than any oterh from Stranger is when he is discussing sculpture with Ben...it got me looking into Rodin's work, and realising the difference between 'art' and as Heinlein diescribes it...'intelectual masturbatio' that passes as modern art.
greg
Post by: SteveS on December 02, 2005, 11:03:32 AM
Quote from: jfruser
SIASL is the only RAH book I started but did not finish.
I have read a bunch of his books & IMO, SISL did not measure up the the rest I have read.
I finished it, but agree that it wasn't as good as his other stuff. At the time I read it, it was only the second Heinlein book I had read and I considered not reading any of his other books. I am glad I went on to others. Every author is entitled to a few "stinkers."
I have read a bunch of his books & IMO, SISL did not measure up the the rest I have read.