azurelunatic | Heinlein Women (crosspost from the list)

When growing up, I noticed that the ideal Heinlein woman was smart, bisexual, horny, good with children, an expert markswoman, prepared for every eventuality, and capable of mastering anything she tried, very quickly.

I wanted to grow up and kick, ah, "anatomy" like Friday, be householdy and practical like Janet (was that her name? The other woman in _Friday_, the one with the two husbands), make love with the skill of all the Heinlein women known to be skilled in the art put together, be all-around resourceful and twisty-minded like Hazel, and continue kicking anatomy with serenity like Cordelia after I found the gang of heavily armed Amazons (or male equivalent) who would love me freely and forever. With the Martian training of Mike Smith, the information manipulation retrieval, and analytical skills of Mr. Spock, the diplomacy of Miles, and the grace, beauty, brains, and technical skill of Lt. Uhura.

Heinlein women were an excellent role model to me when growing up. It will be interesting to re-read from an adult perspective. I have noticed that some of my favorite books when growing up (M*rc*d*s L*ck*y) did not age particularly well. Someone onlist said of that particular author, some years ago, that some authors have an axe to grind; this author takes the axe and bludgeons you about the head with the dull side... I've found that increasingly true with some of her books, especially those specifically targeted for a younger audience. I'm hoping that at least Friday will stand up to the test of time. I found that Gillian became less interesting after learning Martian; Anne became more interesting.

As an interesting and amusing contrast to the stereotypical attitude from a completely male-dominated society, until the age of ten, I believed with all my little heart that boys could not grow up to be teachers, because they were not smart enough... Somehow my father was an exception, just as smart as a girl.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The "pictures" I referred to aren't really illustrations. They're sort of a mathematician's acid trip with random naked women in them, at least at the beginning of the book. They degrade as the book continues. It's possible to look at the pretty pictures while ignoring the text. (I like reading the text, but had issues with much of its content.)

I agree with you on Heinlein being fun to read, even while he's being impossible ("There are four sorts of people: real men, who carry guns and can be shot at; policemen, who carry guns and can't be shot at; wimps, who can't carry guns and can't be shot at; and women, whose job it is to be decorative, fought over, and occasionally fainting" <-- my summation of the world in _Beyond This Horizon_ (I think), explaining why I had to put the book down before I went and strangled a random male)

I'm not sure if you were trying to say this or not, but one of the reasons (imo) he's better at shorts is that the reader expects less detailed characterization and no growth in short stories. I personally like _All You Zombies_ best. Really though, many people write better short stories than he does. Nancy Kress and Greg Egan spring to mind. (Yes, I'm bookpushing)

I'd heard that he'd had oxygen deprivation problems towards the end of his life, which is when he wrote most of his weirdest and thickest novels.

Female in question, actually, does wind up kicking more ass, after the guy gets over a few of his bits of masculinist perspective. ...Rather, she kicks ass in spite of.

Asimov's short stories are to be delighted over, though some of his longer works failed to get my attention.

Sorry, it's been a while since I read the book and I read it in chunks (because I didn't particularly want to try to kill any of the guys around me. I was at CTY at the time). Forgotten most of it. I do remember that part of the general point was "an armed society is a polite society". I live in LA and can easily say Bullshit to that one.

Asimov can be fun, but I much prefer psychological sf. Minds are fundamentally fascinating, especially when you try to take them apart.

Brains....

Well, if everyone in the armed society were armed, *and* everyone agreed to adhere to the "Gentlebeings Code of Armed Conduct", in the logical sense of "and"...

...The second half is more the problem, I fear.

And the fun with Asimov is the taking apart of *his* brain! Braiiiiiinnnnssss...

But if everybody behaved, we wouldn't need guns. Having the implied threat of "be nice to this person or they'll shoot you" is not going to help anything. Our current system handles diverging definitions of "nice" with nothing more than annoyance.

I think we'd do better by focusing on basic kindergarden values: politeness, sharing, not doing things just to annoy other people, trying to understand what other people want and don't want, etc.

If everybody just got along...

The trouble is the "diverging values of 'nice'". When everybody assumes that everyone thinks just like them, that's where troubles start to creep in.

He died, IIRC, as a result of a brain tumor. _Number of the Beast_ was written fairly close to his death.

And, yes, that's pretty much what I was trying to say, re: short stories. I'm just not very coherent this week.

I'm not sure if the oxygen deprivation was related to his death or not. I'll have to try to remember where I found the mention. I remember thinking of it as a decently authoritative source. Hmm.

A brain tumor would explain some of the more dreamlike qualities in _Beast_. "And then we all went to Oz and then the spaceship talked to us and then we went *whoosh!* and almost knocked over all the little people and then it was real scary and then we met everybody and said hi and had sex with them and stuff!"

Okay, random doublechecking. He has Deety "sprawl on her belly" in the Wonderland scene. Women that chesty don't do that. She's got a 95 cm bust, a 48 cm waist, is 170 cm tall and weighs 59 kilos. Translating into the English system, that's 38" bust, 19+" waist, 5'8", and 130 lb.

Somebody had been playing with his granddaughter's Barbie dolls again, I see... ;)

Okay... according to http://www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah/rahfaq.html he never wrote anything (that was published) while he was dealing with oxygen deprivation.

He died of emphysema in 1988.

Okay, never mind. Bad memory of mine.

Well, in Wonderland, you don't have tits, you have "a bosom". Remember?

I bet masturbation, even, just wouldn't happen there.

Well, yes, but a bosom that's twice as big as your waist still takes up room. I don't have any dolls on hand to try it, but if you put Barbie on her front, I don't think she's lying on her stomach. Humans do have more flexible spines and maybe bosoms don't hurt as much when squashed as breasts do, but it still seems odd.

I really strongly doubt masturbation, sex, nudity, etc would happen in Wonderland. Babies might magically appear somehow, although I don't remember any.

(Oh dear. I remember reading a description of some improbable female character or other as "having been hit in the back by a brace of torpedos". This is combining with silmarian's Barbie idea to produce the idea of toys with reversible breasts. You press them and they pop through to the other side. Eep.)

Well, *I* lie on my stomach all the time.... carefully, as not to pinch nipples or fully squash breasts, but I do flop on my tummy.

Must measure breasts vs waist when I get home.

I do too, but I'm not very busty. Most women seem not to, especially on hard surfaces like concrete dorm floors. You're curvy though, so you work as a counterexample. Hmm. Okay, objection withdrawn.

Well, concrete dorm floors would strike me as more cold-uncomfortable than hard-uncomfortable.

Not really. SoCal, remember? That plus the layer of industrial-grade ugly carpet kept their temperature reasonable.

Oh, carpet. There I was, thinking bare concrete.

You can get away with having it plot-driven, in other words?

Pretty much. Really awful of either will kill a book, but mediocre characters can be saved by a great plot, and vice-versa.

Heinlein Women (crosspost from the list)

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Exactly.

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Wonderland

Re: Wonderland

Re: Wonderland

Re: Wonderland

Re: Wonderland

Re: Wonderland

Re: Wonderland

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...

Re: Responding here instead of the Bujold list...