7 ms·

The book (one of my favourites) is a little diffrent. There the perspective is that of the mobile infantist. The classic hero arc but in a fashist world. Like i

by progre 5y ago

The book (one of my favourites) is a little diffrent. There the perspective is that of the mobile infantist. The classic hero arc but in a fashist world. Like in the movie, there is no enlightenment or revolution though, just the story of a regular directionless Joe who finds his true self and a purpose in life in the Mobile Infantry. The movie is brilliant in a diffrent way. It's basically satire on all levels. Paul Verhoeven claimed he hated the book and didn't finish it. Red Letter Media has a very good analyis of the whole thing: https://youtu.be/OkEdyq3UE5M https://youtu.be/OkEdyq3UE5M "How do you tell your actor that you cast them as a joke?"

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
einpoklum 5y ago
The book is brilliant, I would say, for being readable at the same time as an ode of support and admiration for the social order, and as a scathing critique of that order. IIANM Heinlein himself was more on the side of the first interpretation (correct me if I'm wrong) but was fair enough to offer solid footing for the opposite view; although one wonders how much of it was conscious and how much of it was his capability for credible depiction of social and political phenomena, complete with the warts and flaws. Verhoeven's book is more obviously satirical, and I recall getting the clear message of how the Humans are a mirror image of the Bugs.
- quantumwannabe 5y ago
  The book is a vehicle for Heinlein's political views and he is 100% in support of the ideology described. The political system described in the book isn't fascism, rather it is democracy with the franchise limited to people who have served their country. Heinlein believes people who have never made personal sacrifices make poor decisions and therefore political power should be limited to people who have made such sacrifices. It's the same reason why children lack the right to vote in real-world democracies: a lack of experience to base decisions on. Heinlein also believes that democracy and human rights are fragile and need to be actively defended, not taken for granted. Verhoeven's movie is just a campy film; the man admitted that he stopped reading the book as soon as he saw the first "fascist" element, because he thinks that "military" equals "fascism". The movie is a strawman that does not represent Heinlein's views and is best thought of as a mindless action movie with a simple message of "war bad" instead of biting political satire.
  - beebmam 5y ago
    Yes, exactly. Whether one agrees with Heinlein's views or not, his work should likely be put in context. Heinlein's interviews are a good place for that context.
  - einpoklum 5y ago
    > it is democracy with the franchise limited to people who have served their country That's what the system teaches you in school. But IIRC, Heinlein did not force this down your throat as an absolute truth. In fact, and again IIRC, there was never any proper public discussion we are made aware of, of the reason for the war against the bugs. It's even possible that it's a Human-initiated campaign; Rico is not told, nor is he ever concerned with those kinds of things. > Heinlein also believes that democracy and human rights are fragile and need to be actively defended That's one way to characterize it I guess.
- donatj 5y ago
  My personal understanding of Heinlein is that he shifted from a very pro-government conservative to a far more laissez faire libertarian as he aged and as you follow his works throughout his life. Starship Troopers came far earlier in this progression.
  - prox 5y ago
    Do you know where Stranger in a Strange Land sits in this spectrum?
    - donatj 5y ago
      I’ve personally only read Starship Troopers and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, that said Stranger in a Strange Land came really early in his career. My understanding in my comment comes almost entirely from the discussion in this episode of Alienating the Audience https://alienating.libsyn.com/episode-5 https://alienating.libsyn.com/episode-5
  - einpoklum 5y ago
    Possibly, but what I'm saying is that he "lets" you read his book as an anti-government radical, and not feel Heinlein is forcing his beliefs onto the plot.
nirui 5y ago
Contrary to common believes, that a fascist society must visually similar to what been portrayed in a WW2 movie, a real fascist society now days hides behind layers of outlooks that makes them look normal. People in a fascist society may work a well-paid job in a clean glassy high-rise, and their government and law might be structured like a normal one. The most obvious difference between a fascist society and a normal society is probably how the society create and changes it's laws, which is complex to observe even in a normal society. This is the reason why so many people couldn't believe it when they're already in one. "There is no effort ... I mean they do all the scientific research, but they never investigate how to communicate with them, how to have peaceful solution... their society thrive on the need of an enemy. And they have all these space ships and faster than light travel, they made all this advancements, but it's a fascist society that just breeds his bread for war." (11:07) This cuts really deep.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  > People in a fascist society may work a well-paid job in a clean glassy high-rise Just like under fascism in Italy and Germany. Most people would spend their attention on work and entertainment, often avoiding discussing politics and ignore dissenting voices outside of the overton window. Sounds familiar?
  - nirui 5y ago
    > Most people would spend their attention on work and entertainment And most of their life would be normal, happy, even fulfilling until the very moment they "stepped over the red line". I've observed many instances in the past, so yes, I'm very familiar of it. In fact, people has invented a term for it already, it's called *** ****.
    - goodpoint 5y ago
      > it's called ** **. huh?
      - FooBarBizBazz 5y ago
quacked 5y ago
> Like in the movie, there is no enlightenment or revolution though, just the story of a regular directionless Joe who finds his true self and a purpose in life in the Mobile Infantry This is a very shallow interpretation of the book. When did you read it?
- wpietri 5y ago
  I've read it a few times and think that's a fine take. What's your issue with it?
  - quacked 5y ago
    I didn't mean for my original message to come across harshly. The plot is ancillary; the novel is really a description of a certain kind of martial logic, and a criticism of larger society that the author grew up in. Juan Rico is a stand-in for the reader, only there to be a blank slate upon which Heinlein's ideas about society and the military are imparted. It's most more of a treatise than a story. A lot of people seem to be comparing the book and the movie as if they're on equal footing, which I do not think they are.
- watwut 5y ago
  I have seen the book quoted in defense of near fascists ideas (like that soldiers should have more say in politics and more voting rights then civilians). In full seriousness. I have never seen it quoted to support anything else.
  - chernevik 5y ago
    The book is very clear that everyone, regardless of ability, has a right to perform the term of service necessary for the franchise, and that all have complete freedom of speech. There are many sloppy criticisms of the book, none of which have bothered to actually understand it.
    - watwut 5y ago
      Convinced pacifists and those unwilling to become part of their army don't get to vote. Everybody who votes is expected to spend enough time in military to be shaped and molded by them. Plus, the book is clear on superiority of soldiers when it comes to making state and political decisions. That are fairly fascist ideas, very straightforwardly. Besides, my point is about people who quote it. This book quotes are never used for anything else except ideas like this.

by progre 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

einpoklum 5y ago

The book is brilliant, I would say, for being readable at the same time as an ode of support and admiration for the social order, and as a scathing critique of that order. IIANM Heinlein himself was more on the side of the first interpretation (correct me if I'm wrong) but was fair enough to offer solid footing for the opposite view; although one wonders how much of it was conscious and how much of it was his capability for credible depiction of social and political phenomena, complete with the warts and flaws. Verhoeven's book is more obviously satirical, and I recall getting the clear message of how the Humans are a mirror image of the Bugs.

quantumwannabe 5y ago
The book is a vehicle for Heinlein's political views and he is 100% in support of the ideology described. The political system described in the book isn't fascism, rather it is democracy with the franchise limited to people who have served their country. Heinlein believes people who have never made personal sacrifices make poor decisions and therefore political power should be limited to people who have made such sacrifices. It's the same reason why children lack the right to vote in real-world democracies: a lack of experience to base decisions on. Heinlein also believes that democracy and human rights are fragile and need to be actively defended, not taken for granted. Verhoeven's movie is just a campy film; the man admitted that he stopped reading the book as soon as he saw the first "fascist" element, because he thinks that "military" equals "fascism". The movie is a strawman that does not represent Heinlein's views and is best thought of as a mindless action movie with a simple message of "war bad" instead of biting political satire.
- beebmam 5y ago
  Yes, exactly. Whether one agrees with Heinlein's views or not, his work should likely be put in context. Heinlein's interviews are a good place for that context.
- einpoklum 5y ago
  > it is democracy with the franchise limited to people who have served their country That's what the system teaches you in school. But IIRC, Heinlein did not force this down your throat as an absolute truth. In fact, and again IIRC, there was never any proper public discussion we are made aware of, of the reason for the war against the bugs. It's even possible that it's a Human-initiated campaign; Rico is not told, nor is he ever concerned with those kinds of things. > Heinlein also believes that democracy and human rights are fragile and need to be actively defended That's one way to characterize it I guess.
donatj 5y ago
My personal understanding of Heinlein is that he shifted from a very pro-government conservative to a far more laissez faire libertarian as he aged and as you follow his works throughout his life. Starship Troopers came far earlier in this progression.
- prox 5y ago
  Do you know where Stranger in a Strange Land sits in this spectrum?
  - donatj 5y ago
    I’ve personally only read Starship Troopers and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, that said Stranger in a Strange Land came really early in his career. My understanding in my comment comes almost entirely from the discussion in this episode of Alienating the Audience https://alienating.libsyn.com/episode-5 https://alienating.libsyn.com/episode-5
- einpoklum 5y ago
  Possibly, but what I'm saying is that he "lets" you read his book as an anti-government radical, and not feel Heinlein is forcing his beliefs onto the plot.

nirui 5y ago

Contrary to common believes, that a fascist society must visually similar to what been portrayed in a WW2 movie, a real fascist society now days hides behind layers of outlooks that makes them look normal. People in a fascist society may work a well-paid job in a clean glassy high-rise, and their government and law might be structured like a normal one. The most obvious difference between a fascist society and a normal society is probably how the society create and changes it's laws, which is complex to observe even in a normal society. This is the reason why so many people couldn't believe it when they're already in one. "There is no effort ... I mean they do all the scientific research, but they never investigate how to communicate with them, how to have peaceful solution... their society thrive on the need of an enemy. And they have all these space ships and faster than light travel, they made all this advancements, but it's a fascist society that just breeds his bread for war." (11:07) This cuts really deep.

goodpoint 5y ago
> People in a fascist society may work a well-paid job in a clean glassy high-rise Just like under fascism in Italy and Germany. Most people would spend their attention on work and entertainment, often avoiding discussing politics and ignore dissenting voices outside of the overton window. Sounds familiar?
- nirui 5y ago
  > Most people would spend their attention on work and entertainment And most of their life would be normal, happy, even fulfilling until the very moment they "stepped over the red line". I've observed many instances in the past, so yes, I'm very familiar of it. In fact, people has invented a term for it already, it's called *** ****.
  - goodpoint 5y ago
    > it's called ** **. huh?
    - FooBarBizBazz 5y ago

quacked 5y ago

> Like in the movie, there is no enlightenment or revolution though, just the story of a regular directionless Joe who finds his true self and a purpose in life in the Mobile Infantry This is a very shallow interpretation of the book. When did you read it?

wpietri 5y ago
I've read it a few times and think that's a fine take. What's your issue with it?
- quacked 5y ago
  I didn't mean for my original message to come across harshly. The plot is ancillary; the novel is really a description of a certain kind of martial logic, and a criticism of larger society that the author grew up in. Juan Rico is a stand-in for the reader, only there to be a blank slate upon which Heinlein's ideas about society and the military are imparted. It's most more of a treatise than a story. A lot of people seem to be comparing the book and the movie as if they're on equal footing, which I do not think they are.
watwut 5y ago
I have seen the book quoted in defense of near fascists ideas (like that soldiers should have more say in politics and more voting rights then civilians). In full seriousness. I have never seen it quoted to support anything else.
- chernevik 5y ago
  The book is very clear that everyone, regardless of ability, has a right to perform the term of service necessary for the franchise, and that all have complete freedom of speech. There are many sloppy criticisms of the book, none of which have bothered to actually understand it.
  - watwut 5y ago
    Convinced pacifists and those unwilling to become part of their army don't get to vote. Everybody who votes is expected to spend enough time in military to be shaped and molded by them. Plus, the book is clear on superiority of soldiers when it comes to making state and political decisions. That are fairly fascist ideas, very straightforwardly. Besides, my point is about people who quote it. This book quotes are never used for anything else except ideas like this.