The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - a belated book report by EnderW24

Cafe Society
1

Ahem

So back around three and a half years ago, I picked up my very first Heinlein book, The Cat Who Walked Through Walls. I thought it to be an incomprehensible mess and said so in this thread. Turns out that the reason was twofold: 1) This was Heinlein’s second to last novel and he was building upon a universe that I had absolutely no experience with 2) This was his second to last novel and Heinlein was old and…maybe not completely altogether there.

So Jonathan Chance made me a very generous offer that I couldn’t refuse. He sent me three of Heinlein’s earlier books for free. All I had to do was report on them!

Well I got through The Door into Summer and Have Spacesuit - Will Travel and then…stopped. No real idea why, I just did.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress Hugo Award winner and probably the best of the three has been sitting on my bookshelf for upwards of four years now, taunting me, mocking me for not reading it. So a week ago, I picked it up, determined to finish it.

And now I have.

The short summary: TMIAHM takes place (now) 70 years in the future on the moon where The Authority rules through a bureaucracy that taxes the moon farmers into poverty. The protagonist, Manuel Garcia O’Kelly-Davis, teams with a loyal group of resistance fighters and a sentient computer to overthrow the government and declare independence.

Manuel Garcia “Mannie” O’Kelly-Davis is an interesting name for the protagonist. Half Mexican, Half Irish, Half American, Half everybody, and narrates with a Russian accent. That accent was really hard to help get me in the story, by the way. When you’re reading, you never tend to notice the word “the” in a sentence. But let me tell you, you absolutely notice it when it’s missing!

I really liked Mike, the computer. MYCROFT sounded so much like Microsoft it was eerie. I kept waiting and expecting him to turn evil or go haywire to doublecross the resistance but that never happened. I have to give credit where credit is due here. What I really enjoyed most is that this book didn’t seem dated at all. It was published in 1965, nearly half a century ago at the dawn or even pre-dawn of what we’d consider the age of computers. Yet never once when reading this book did I say “wow, did Heinlein ever get that idea wrong.”

Now…on the subject of females. His views and attitudes towards the “fairer sex” were most certainly enlightened by '60s standards, but somewhat laughable now. Yes, women are powerful and empowering, but it’s difficult to both respect them and whistle at them. You can’t show how much you value their guidance and authority while refusing to let them go on dangerous missions because Og-Forbid their beautiful bodies and curvaceous 15 year old girl breasts get damaged.

Which moves us to polyamory. I think Heinlein set it up and explained it as best he could, but I still just didn’t buy it. Society as a whole just doesn’t work like that. Sure some people do, and more power to them. But not everyone and I don’t think it would be the case even when forced to by circumstance. So when you suddenly merge all the groups of society into one localized spot, you STILL shouldn’t get polyamory as a result. OK, so there’s a real shortage of females and men have the option of either being respectful or getting thrown out an airlock. This I get. But it doesn’t explain how people arrived at the concept of these line marriages or clan marriages where you get a 1 for 1 ratio of men to women because the entire point seems to be there’s a SHORTAGE of women!

What I also found unbelievable is that people on Earth had almost no concept of what life on the moon was like, despite 100 years of humans living on it. Yes, I know that being jailed for polyamory was a setup designed to make them look sympathetic. But really, until Mannie told them, they had no clue? No one did a background check on the two revolutionaries sent to Earth on behalf of a recent overthrow of the government? No one knew how prevalent polyamory was up there?
Besides, the reporters who interviewed Mannie and the Professor really wouldn’t be as aggressive and rude when trying to get a story from them.

There’s a lot more I could say about this book, but I think I’ll see where the discussion goes. What did you all like/dislike? I did enjoy it, yet overall I think that maybe Heinlein isn’t fully my cup of tea.
[sub]CalMeacham, What Exit?, silenus, Chronos, Tamerlane, Jayjay, Polycarp,you all were part of the original thread as well. Just wanted to give a shoutout in case you do a vanity search.[/sub]

2

This is one of my favorite books and Heinlein is my second favorite author.

I think you make a good point about the Line Marriages and I cannot defend his logic. His portrayal of women was forward thinking for the time. Advance even compared to Star Trek I would say but does seem dated by today’s standards.

What I loved about it was the real story. The secret network set up as a Covert Cell structure. I loved the politics and wrangling of the book. I believe la Paz picked an area and reporters for Manny to talk to that were extra backwards as he wanted Manny arrested. I enjoyed the reference to NORAD via Cheyenne Mountain. Of course this is also the source of TANSTAAFL (“There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch”),

I enjoyed the lesson in ballistics via the electromagnetic catapults. This, loglan, proper treatment of Lasers and his details on Solar Power and its abilities is what always make Heinlein books extra treats, hard Science in Sci-Fi. What I love most about the book was probably Mycroft. One of the best characters ever and he was a computer.

Finally I loved Hazel and her Irregulars. I loved the way Heinlein connected Moon with his earlier romp The Rolling Stones.

It is time for them to make a great movie from this book.

3

Moon wasn’t book I cared for, but I’ve got no trouble with people on Earth being very ignorant about lunar culture.

The U.S. conducted an invasion of a big Middle Eastern country recently and a lot of the people in charge didn’t know the significance of Sunni and Shite. Most of the U.S. population knew almost nothing about Iraq.

Most U.S. citizens don’t know the names of the leaders of Canada and Mexico.

I’d say that if there was a lunar colony that after the first ten years, press coverage would dwindle down to nothing.

(…I didn’t care for Mike. Cutesy name, and too consciously calculated to be endearing. And in my (terrible) memory I see the chimp in Jerry Was a Man as as pretty much the same character (except not a brilliant computer…)

4

AND “The Cat Who Walked Through Walls.” I really don’t mind Heinlein’s later novels. To tell the truth, Number of the Beast was my very first Heinlein, so I have a very sentimental opinion of it that will differ from the majority of Heinlein fans’ opinions. I tend to look at the whole “open-multiverse” format of the later novels as a sort of wish for all of his brainchildren to have a place to “retire”…he was 80 years old when he died, and had had a series of illnesses and medical events for at least the previous decade. He knew he didn’t have long to live, I’m sure. He wanted to see them all safely gathered together and happy (thus the final party/resort scene in TNOTB).

5

But when I read **Moon **the first time **Cat **hadn’t been written yet. I had already read the inspiration for Star Trek’s best episode, “Trouble with Tribbles”, The Rolling Stones. :slight_smile:

I really like The Number of the Beast. I know **Skald **shares our love for it. I actually read it as a brand new Heinlein book and as the first in years, I was really excited by it and it did not disappoint. As I was a young geeky teen I also found it titillating. I really enjoyed that party scene at the end too and all the Oz stuff.

6

Well, “I for one welcome our new Galactic Overlords!”

Oops – wrong meme.

Actually, what I’d like to see is Ender’s reviews of Have Spacesuit – Will Travel and The Door Into Summer, which are, not incidentally, two of my most favorite Heinleins.

As for the lunar marriage customs: It’s not ‘polyamory’ in the sense that poeple like Why Not use the term. It is, intentionally, marital customs that do not conform to American/Western European monogamy – and the premise makes sense. Remember that Heinlein was a strong feminist of sorts – that women are equally competent and skilled as men – back when SF was the exclusive province of nerdy fanboys who had no clue how to relate to gurls. (And he also recognized a male imperative to protect and defend the beloved, which most feminists ignore.) The marital customs of Luna are founded on the idea that the moon was originally populated by prisoners – criminal and political – with about a 10:1 male/female ratio. This left the women with the upper hand, presuming that heterosexuality is the norm for the overwhelming majority of the population, and the customs reflect this. The precise example of Mannie’s family doesn’t reflect the original disparity – because the woman who founded it decided she wanted a marriage that would last, and co-opted husbands and junior wives who were prepared to agree with her system. And the one family meeting illustrated, when Wyoh ia opted in, is depicted as the women making the choice, then, as a family eccentricity not shared by most other such marriages, giving the men the right to state their views.

People adapt to see the norms of their society as ‘normal’ – and that’s precisely what Heinlein shows. When a woman can choose how she will relate to the men around her, and have the society back her up, she will likely choose a stable family structure that allows her a degree of freedom. And because most men have been raised in societies where defending the women is a given for ‘being a man’, they will back her in her decisions when she’s part of ‘a scarce commodity.’ (It’s important to recognize that we’re not talking just sex here but the panoply of male-female relationships. Manny’s relation to Mimi is almost Oedipal – yeah, they sleep together as senior wife and junior husband, but most of how he relates to her is as a mother figure.)

And it is that social background – and Manny’s socially-ingrained gallantry towards Wyoh – that makes the plot of the story work.

7

I think the idea is that, originally, there was a significant gender disparity on the colony, and that broke down the traditional structures of marriage. But by the time of the story, native Loonies now significantly outnumber the transportees, so the gender ratio has now reverted much closer to 50-50. But traditional models of marriage having already been broken down, the way was paved for other nontraditional forms which nonetheless had equal numbers of men and women.

8

Tim Minear of "Firefly’ has written a screenplay of TMIAHM that is available on the Net. I’ll try to give the link tomorrow from work, if needed. I found it pretty good and would like to see a movie of it.

This is my favourite Heinlein book, and has been tre-read many times. Mannie’s voice is not Russian, but Loonie, and is one of the best things about the narration. Other great things are the mechanics of revolution, Mike’s omnipotence and cunning, the whole David versus Goliath bit.

9

I’ve heard he was shopping it around I hope he finds a studio.

I would love to read it if you find the link.

10

Me, too. I haven’t read TMIAHM in decades - since high school, I think - but I really enjoyed it at the time. Time for the Stars, Starship Troopersand Glory Road are my other favorite Heinlein stories. “The Unpleasant Profession of Jonathan Hoag,” a short story or novella I guess, could also be a great movie with the right script, director and cast.

11

Ask and ye shall re-sieve:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=342503&highlight=heinlein

12

I saved the link from when it had been posted in a previous thread, although I never did finish reading it.

TMIAHM is also one of my (many) Heinlein favorite books. Among the others are Glory Road, Double Star, Citizen of the Galaxy, and Space Cadet.

13

Couple of minor points: 1) I wouldn’t say Mannie has a Russian accent: the Loonie dialect of English has a lot of Russian loan words but, if anything, his slang is Australian - Fair Dinkum, Cobber! 2) Apart from Heinlein’s general attitudes, the tension between women being powerful and being protected by their menfolk make sense in context given a historic scarcity of women.

On the line marriage: clearly the Davis family is successful and happy but Heinlein wasn’t blind to the potential problems. In Friday, Friday herself is part of a line marriage in New Zealand that breaks down in jealousy and greed.

14

LurkMeister, thanks, that’s the link I had. And I would recommend finishing it. It’s interesting to see where he differs from the original plot and details and I suppose cinematically you could understand why. The whole thing about Mike appearing directly visually to the Loonies is tremendous!

15

I think you’d find that TMIAHM would stand the test of time very well. Well worth reading again.

Whenever I take pleasure in eating I’m reminded of that passage from “Jonathan Hoag” !

16

And racism. One of the daughters (?) is planning on marrying a Maori, and several members of the marriage react negatively.

17

I read a bit more of it last night. I had noticed the changes, and even though one or two of my favorite scenes were missing I could see why.

18

I really didn’t like this script and wouldn’t want to see the film. It’s obviously not in the *Starship Troopers *class but I think it misses a hell of a lot of the essence of the book. Maybe the changes are essential for a film but many of them seem just done for the sake of it.

19

Nope – this is a bit of an ironic twist. She’s marrying a Fijian – shock! gasp! – and that is miscegenation (by NZ in Friday standards). If she had wanted to marry a Maori, that would have been quite socially acceptable, especially if he were descended from an early canoe (and hence high in the Maori social order). The point, of course, is that both Fijians and Maori are Polynesians.

20

Sorry, it’s been a few years since I read it.