On Re-reading all of Robert Heinlein via The Virginia Edition

“Coventry” was written around the time when Heinlein was going through some pretty major personal and philosophical development. Heinlein started out as a person on the left who flirted with oddball political systems like Social Credit, and who supported socialist Upton Sinclair. His work with those movements disillusioned him, and by the mid-1950’s he was basically a right-wing cold warrior.

Heinlein’s big problem in his youth was that he was a strong patriot and a believer in the military and many traditional values, while at the same time being an iconoclast and a bit of a libertine. The two did not mix well. I think you can see the tension of this in “Coventry” and “If This Goes On…”, whereas later works like “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” showed a Heinlein more comfortable with his political philosophy which I would call a sort of “muscular libertarianism” - libertarianism without the pacifism and isolationism, basically.

Well… some vague truths strung together rather haphazardly, here. I suggest you might want to read Patterson’s biography.

Also summed up, harshly but not unfairly, as “I want the freedom to grow rich while you can have the freedom to starve.”

Well, he would never deny anyone else the freedom to grow rich, would he?

Perhaps. Heinlein did live through the Great Depression. On the other hand, it could be seen instead as a recognition by the government and society that reaching out into space is such a vital importance to humanity that it takes a dedicated and collective effort to make dramatic achievements.

I think of MacKinnon as a caricature of a kind of libertarian - he has no use for the rules of his society (even though those rules are very loose by our standards - he doesn’t have the “right” to punch someone who offended him), and thinks of himself as a rugged outdoorsman while traveling in a vehicle something like an RV crossed with a tank, and he foolishly expects a free society of other rugged types on the other side of the wall.

There’s that. There is also that the libertarian paradise of Coventry, like all such, can only exist because it’s surrounded and supported by a strong governmental entity, which does indeed monitor and intervene in the internal goings-on.

If there’s an authentic - however weak - libertarian in the story, it’s the doctor.

Rather than MacKinnon being a type of libertarian isn’t he one of Heinlein’s victims of their soft upbringing? Brought up after the fall of the Prophet under the Covenant he has never had to learn the hard truths - as Henlein saw it - of human nature.

Isn’t the world outside of Coventry more Heinlein’s idea of a successful libertarian system: maximum individual freedom, the State only intervening where one persons actions cause actual harm to another but with a self sacrificing military protecting and making this possible for the civilians. A very early precursor to Starship Troopers maybe?

First, cite your basis for “a self-sacrificing etc.” - I don’t recall it from the story.

The comparison with ST is apt in that case, because most discussions of the government and society therein are built on suppositions and inserts from the reader, and not on the very scant scraps actually included by Heinlein. It becomes not a discussion of the story or of Heinlein, but yet another “what if” political conversation.

Um! It is a long time since I read the story but my memory was that the most positive character, and the one who actually had his act together, was “The Fader”, the US Army undercover agent doing the dangerous task of getting the information on the planned attack on the Barrier. Doesn’t he serve the same function as Lt. Colonel Dubois in ST, explaining the real situation to our young protagonist and helping him to grow into Heinlein’s self-sufficient adult? Again military but not in uniform.

My memory is that the ending of the story makes it clear that it is the vigilance of the US Army that allows the comfortable world of the the Covenant to continue.

Which is precisely what I said, and, in the real world, what permits “Libertarian” towns and enclaves to exist - being surrounded by a solid and protective social, economic and defensive matrix so they can play otherwise unworkable political games.

I agree with the first statement - life under the “Covenant” is a very free society, that MacKinnon does not appreciate. I’m not sure about “self-sacrificing” military though - Fader works for the Army, and the Army guards the exits from Coventry, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re self-sacrificing - Fader probably enjoys his job.

I’ve never seen ST as particularly libertarian…

I think we’re all violently agreeing :smiley:

Yeah…

Well, knock it off!

I’m sorry, is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?

Twenty bucks, same as in town.

Whoops, wrong thread. :smiley:

Well, the long and short of it is the difference between a stable liberal democracy, which is what I’m assuming the world of the covenant is (based on very sketchy info given) and the unstable anarchy inside the barrier. Anarchy, or lack of government, too easily collapses into governmental systems, some truly antithetical to liberty in the extreme.

Methuselah’s Children - from The Future History of Robert Heinlein Vol. II

Or, where it all began, Mark II.

Originally entitled While the Evil Days Come Not (and earlier parts of two story notes The Shadow of Death and Longevity) this is the first appearance of The Howard Families and Heinlein’s most recurring character, Lazarus Long aka Woodrow Wilson Smith aka Captain Aaron Sheffield.

It concerns the persecution of a group of people who have extended lifetimes. Lazarus Long, for example, is over 200 years old at the time the story begins. Once the short-lived know the Howards are out there they pursue them to discover their secret.

Interestingly, in MC there is no secret. It’s genetics and a selective breeding program. However, it wasn’t always that way. According to the story notes, the original idea was that the long-lived got that way through positive thinking ‘visualizing’ themselves as healthier and younger. THAT would have meant that there was a secret worth peeling out of them and taken the story in an all new direction.

However, John W. Campbell hated that idea. According to the notes he said, “It was fishy and it stunk.” Heinlein argued, Campbell stood firm and Heinlein responded to the demands of the customer and come up with the genetic explanation on the fly. So the basis of the biggest, longest running concept of his writing career, The Howard Families and their long livespans, was a patchwork job to get Campbell to buy a story. Excellent.

One of the interesting things about the story isn’t necessarily the space travel - in the story the Howard’s flee Earth in a stolen spacecraft. Well and good. But we also see, at the very highest levels, how the Covenant-based government that is held so highly in Coventry and Misfit is showing cracks. The members of the Howard Families are protected by the covenant, sure, but not when the government thinks they’re withholding longevity information from the rest of the world. Instead, with little thought, the covenant is placed aside and the members of the Howard Families are placed under arrest and even potentially torture to extract the secret. When they state that there is no secret that’s brushed aside and the government redoubles its efforts against them. In this, again, Heinlein notes that governments and social systems don’t remain static and that even systems that respect the rights of the individual eventually fall or grow corrupt or calcified.

This also features the first appearance, as mentioned, of Lazarus Long, a character I’ve heard many describe as a bit of a Mary sue for Heinlein, himself. In this one, Long is the oldest member of the families but not an active one. He left Earth before the Prophet and spent time bouncing around the solar system being, I guess, irascible and getting in and out of troubles. He’s used, in this story, as a character who is NOT convinced of the rightness of the covenant and responsibility of the government. He is, instead, far more ready to break laws and force his will on others. He even complains that the people in the current time are much tamer and tighter-wound than when he was a boy in the early 20th century. Hell, just quickly I think a court could pin on him, in addition to grand theft starship, piracy, filing a false flight plan, breaking and entering, interference with a policeman, assault and battery, assault against a law enforcement office, kidnapping and likely a few others. He is more David McKinnon with eyes open that he’s like the rest of the families.

Another, very interesting to me, character is Ellen Johnson. She’s a background character used to show some of the effect of events on the standard family members. She first appears with a small baby when the families are rounded up. She is determined that, when they try their escape, that even if she gets left behind, the child gets to go. Later, on other worlds, she pops up, continually thinking about her son and raising him and doing what she thinks is best for him. In the end, he sneaks away to board the ship when she decides to stay behind on a planet and not return to Earth.

It occurred to me, reading this, that Ellen is a Heinlein matron as she develops. Instead of being the annoying matron that we see most of the time, instead this shows her growing and becoming her role. It’s a lot more sympathetic. She’s not a particularly strong personality, but she does try to learn to control her life and the circumstances of her child. Over time that grows more controlling (according to the boy) until he tries to break free and she follows him instead. I think that’s a great ‘Heinlein matron’ in a capsule and does make them more understandable. Interesting reading, there.

Methuselah’s Children also moves the opening dates for the Future History chart back to the creation of the Howard Families in the 1870s. That’s as far back as the revision goes, to the best of my knowledge.

Oh, interesting note at the end: this version of the story ends with “TO BE CONTINUED in Time Enough for Love” The source for this version is the 1967 printing of The Past Through Tomorrow. Was that in there? I don’t recall it but it’s been ages since I’ve seen my copy of that one (and mine would have been the 80s paperback so it might have been removed). It would make sense that the 1967 release, for the last story in the book, would push and upcoming book. But TEFL would be published six years later, in 1973. Seems like a long time.

Interstitial Note: On the page following Methuselah’s Children appear the words:

“And Meanwhile, In Another Part of the Cosmos…”

My New English Library paperback edition dates from 1973, first printed 1971, and doesn’t having anything after the final sentence - not even* The end*!