Bricker, I would point to both “labor battalions” and “non-combat auxiliaries” as evidence that it was all military. Outside the military, you wouldn’t call a work force a “battalion”, and you wouldn’t need to specify that the auxiliaries were “non-combat”. They’re not all front-line soldiers, maybe, but they are all military.
I liked the book and really disliked the movie. The only thing RAH would have liked about the flick was the nudity. Pretty much everything else about the movie sucked.
I think Starship Troopers is a big “thank you” letter to the Marines, who probably saved Heinlein’s butt more than once during his Naval career. It’s also a great book.
I think this thread is too concerned with a distinction between “military” and other service. Forget “military.” There is service, some of which is combat-oriented and some not, but all of which is regimented and demanding (taking account of ability), and all of which confers veteran-citizen status. “Civilians” are those who have not served.
But but…powered armor!
This is an absolutely ridiculous argument by someone determined to hate the book, no matter what. This is equivalent to claiming the Salvation Army is military because they have the word “Army” in their name.
One of the stupidest posts I have ever seen on the Dope.
Where are you getting that Chronos hated the book? I mean, maybe he does, but I’m not seeing it from his posts in this thread and he is obviously a fan of Heinlein generally.
ETA: The Red Planet was the first novel I ever read on my own - my dad picked it out for me off a rack at a drugstore. It’s not the best of his juveniles, but I still have a warm place in my heart for it.
Starship troopers is fun, but IMHO far from his best.
If someone who was determined to hate the book no matter what made that argument, it probably would be ridiculous. In fact, it would be ridiculous for such a person to participate in this thread at all. But I don’t see any such folks here; do you?
Yes, it’s possible for a non-military organization to use military terminology, but I still think it’s pretty telling that all of the examples of “service” in the book are either explicitly military, or use military terminology. Yes, the Salvation Army uses the word “army” in their name, but would you ever say that you were a veteran of the Salvation Army?
I’d also recommend reading Armor by John Steakley. (As well as the Hammer’s Slammers stories and related works by David Drake, of course.)
On another note, what tropes did ST introduce?
I really enjoyed it, but more as a view into Heinlein’s mind rather than an entertaining work of fiction - Heinlein really wasn’t someone who was afraid to go against the grain. I don’t know if I’d recommend it for someone new to Heinlein (or sci-fi) either, though. I also enjoyed “Variable Star”, a novel outlined by Heinlein and written by Spider Robinson.
We recently re-watched “Starship Troopers,” and I really didn’t like it much (I did like the book).
^ 
I was thinking this as I read thru the thread, but my internet coverage was spotty today. Turns out that if you get about 6000 tech geeks in a room together, cel service goes to shit. Go figure.
Thanks for saying it, spark.
I’d just like to drop by and link to my favorite pic of Mr Heinlein…
Also, The Forever War is definitely worth reading.
Considering Heinlein never ever saw combat action in the whole of his life, I hardly see how.
It’s funny it seems the rift between “I love the book, loathe the film” VS “film was great, book wasnt” is the same between typical US deluding themselves about war and militarism (Patton little wannabes) and Euros ecstatic at the trashing of militarists “glorious adventures”.
If you look at how the movie failed at box office in the US, and is still considered a personal insult there, as opposed to how well it fared in the rest of the world, and how well its combination of action and satire was received, I think you’ll see it’s really all about personal ideology, rather than artistic merits.
Several people have recommended Podkayne of Mars. I would like to point out that there is the old edition, where Heinlein was forced by his editor to serve up a “suitable” ending, and the edition that was put out later, with the ending that Heinlein originally wrote. If at all possible, get the edition with Heinlein’s ending, or with both endings. Heinlein’s ending is better, IMO.
You can put me solidly in the liked the book, liked the movie, they just don’t have much to do with each other crowd.
I thought the movie was piles of fun. It wasn’t an adaptation of the novel, and that is a shame, but it was a good popcorn film in its own rights.
True, dat.
This silly canard comes from a hit-piece a disgruntled fan (who became a serious and very thoughtful reviewer in later years) did on Heinlein where he claimed that all of Heinlein’s male characters fit into one of three molds (young/strong, middle-aged/competent, old/wise). The problem is that almost every male character fits into one of those three molds. Gilligan/The Professor/Skipper (or Mr. Howell) for example.
The “They’re all Heinlein” thing totally disintegrates with three words “The Great Lorenzo”. NOTHING like anything we know about any aspect of Heinlein or his life.
There’s a third version, a trade-paperback sized one that (IIRC) was the first BAEN edition where the editor (Jim Baen hisself?) combined the best bits of both endings. I thought Heinlein’s was too bleak and the " suitable" (nice phrase ) ending was totally inadequate in terms of reprecussions.
If you can get your hands on it, it’s (IMO) the best of the endings.
If you haven’t read his “Jumping Off The Planet” trilogy, you should.
-
It’s one of the very, VERY few Heinlein-inspired juvies that aren’t aping Heinlein’s style. It’s very much Gerrold’s own book, but it reads like a Heinlein.
-
It’s got a great gay second-banana character (the story follows a middle brother in his travels with an older (gay) and younger (disturbed) brothers.
The third book gets a tiny bit didactic (there’s a couple of “invisible sky pixie” anti-religous comments that read really weirdly out of place. Not the anti-religion stuff, the actual comments don’t sound right from the character. The sentiment does but the phrasing is off)
Same here.
You and me, both, Tamerlane.
I was a resistant reader, at best, in elementary school. I didn’t like it and when my mom took me to the library I would sulk and not check out any books.
Then, at age 10, while shopping at the A&P in Wilmette, Illinois (right behind the Carson, Pierie, Scott department store) my stopped at the rack of paperbacks and said, “You know what? You might like this.” and handed me a book.
That book was Red Planet. My life changed forever at age 10 because of that book. It is, without a doubt, one of the formative moments of my life.