4 ms·
Also, let me add that I don't think the author is being superficial. I'm sure he has read it far more times than myself or others. But I don't agree with him.
by shepardrtc 11y ago
Also, let me add that I don't think the author is being superficial. I'm sure he has read it far more times than myself or others. But I don't agree with him.
Maybe my strong feeling for what the book is about (or is not about) is affected by me completely ignoring Heinlein himself. I'm not taking into consideration any of his other work or his history. I'm just looking at the book as is.
- justin66 11y agoI think an interpretation of a work completely removed from its historical or literary context is perfectly valid. It's not super surprising that you'd see things differently. I guess there's a lot we could say about all that. I thought the movie version of ST and the book were both very entertaining in their way. (Haldeman's statements about the book as a brilliant didactic novel for teenage boys resonate strongly for me since I did lend the book to a friend who later credited it as an inspiration for his joining the Army...) I thought the movie did a great job of highlighting some of the absurdities of the book and if I had read the book in a certain light I wonder if I might have viewed it similarly.