I thought that the presentation of women in SiaSL was far more archaic than its 1961 publish date should forgive. The book had an old mobster-movie feel about it I wasn’t crazy about either. Will I have the same problems with TMiaHM? I’m sympathetic to libertarian politics and very much like science fiction in general.
Probably. It’s a very good book. Forget the politics and stay for the story.
The two books are about as different as you could expect from a single author. There is no second book like Stranger in Heinlein’s works.
Eh, I thought that the portrayal of the women was, if anything, pretty advanced for the time. Mind you, I don’t LIKE the portrayal of the women. I particularly don’t like the victim blaming of a hypothetical rape. But for its time, the women in the book were treated as more than just cardboard cutouts with different hairstyles, they were treated as individuals.
And do read Mistress. It’s a very different type, and it’s a classic of SF. I’m not a libertarian at all, and I enjoy it. Most of Heinlein’s works are well worth reading. I’m particularly partial to his juveniles.
I can only agree with the others.
As an aside: what does mistress mean in this context; schoolteacher, lover or both? For some reason I have always interpreted it as a teacher who gives a hard lesson, but when I look up different translations those that retain the word have used lover.
Ditto. I never have quite figured out why this novel is so beloved of the libbies, but it’s like saying you can’t enjoy Judy Garland’s singing without being gay. It’s a damned fine novel in almost every respect and we all get to see whatever we want in it.
Even if the probability mathematics are complete nonsense and only one character speaks the supposedly universal Loonie argot. 
It’s said within the novel that “Luna is a harsh schoolmistress” and those who don’t learn her lessons, die.
Panshin hated the title, which just makes me like it all the more.
Here, I’m referring to *Stranger *in particular.
And proving that even admins can miss the microscopic edit window. 
Thank you! It’s nice to be proven right. 
Actually, I could have used my Awesome Admin Superpowers to edit my post…but since there were three replies after my post already, I thought that it would be better to just make a clarifying post.
It’s possible to like one and not the other. I liked parts of Stranger, but overall it wasn’t my favorite.
TMIAHM is one of my top five favorite Heinlein books.
Another “really different” voter: I quite liked Mistress. Probably the only Heinlein I liked. Stranger was long pretentious crap.
Favorite line:
Throw rocks at them.
It probably goes without saying, but “X is a harsh mistress” wasn’t coined by Heinlein, and in days of yore “mistress” meant “female boss”. For example, Humphry Davy advised Faraday that “Science is a harsh mistress” (i.e., Science is being personified as a woman, and she’s a tough boss).
Both books have some philosophical elements, but Stranger is much more about religion and sexuality while Mistress is much more political and legal. Which doesn’t mean it’s dry, but they are very different.
As far as libertarian love for Mistress, it really is a story about overthrowing the big bad government and people running things themselves, with everything from ad-hoc trials to their own currency. It makes it easy to see why libertarianism would be attractive, but any serious student of politics can easily see the big gaps in the book that gloss over the problems of libertarianism.
I just finished reading *Moon *for the first time a couple of days ago. The portrayal of women is in some ways annoying but it’s a good story in spite of that. I definitely liked it better than Stranger.
“Harsh master” is a phrase that predates “harsh mistress”. “Mistress” is the feminine form of master. When the phrase “harsh mistress” came into use (1840s), it was applying the “harsh master” idea to a concept normally feminized in speech, i.e. the sea. The Moon is typically thought of as feminine (Luna). Ergo, “harsh mistress” rather than “harsh master”.
Of course, there’s speculation that Heinlein was using the juxtaposition between the definitions of “mistress” as a kind of double-entendre. YMMV.
To the OP, I would say to give TMIAHM a chance.
Stranger was an interesting concept of looking at human society through the eyes of a stranger. However, it goes in weird directions. It was certainly thought provoking to me when I read it in my 20s, but it does seem a confuddled mess at times.
Mistress is a much more conventional story in that sense. It proposes a different Lunar society, with some of Heinlein’s philosophy behind why that society would be better. But it also has a more coherent plot through it. The group marriage aspects proposed in Mistress are different in some ways than the sex club aspect of Stranger.
I enjoyed TMIAHM, but not SIASL.
To be fair, I read the first as an adult, the second as a child. (I’d read a quote from the latter about art that I liked, which is why I gave it a try.l My library didn’t have any of Heinlein’s juveniles at the time, which I should have read first.)
I did not like Stranger… at all. I was youngish, about 25, in the late 90s, and it was very dated and hard to grok, so to speak. The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress is fan-fricking-tastic, one of my favorite books.