# Which Robert Heinlein Books Are The Best? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 6, 2011, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088 "2011-11-06T19:15:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/61 "2013-07-29T04:59:21Z")
I really liked Time for the Stars. I found it quite moving in parts - both the way in which the one brother dominated the other, and how the passage of time on Earth affected the relationships of the two. I think it’s disliked to a certain degree by some because it’s one of the few Heinlein novels that doesn’t get the physics quite right - I don’t think Heinlein ever quite got his head around some of the nuances of relativity. But other than that, I’m not sure what the deal is, because it’s a perfectly fine Heinlein juvenile that can stand with the rest of them. ---
**Author:** ![vontsira](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/51bf81/32.png) [@vontsira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vontsira)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/62 "2013-07-29T18:36:24Z")
I’m a lover of (some) science fiction, but am woefully science-ignorant: an author could feed to me stuff which was scientifically ludicrously wrong, and I wouldn’t know from nothing. It’s basically the overall flights of fancy, and the human dynamics, that I enjoy in sci-fi. Am glad, anyway, that _Time For The Stars_ has some champions. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/63 "2013-07-29T19:20:42Z")
That’s an interesting question in and of itself – is it easier for those of us relatively unencumbered by a great deal of scientific knowledge to enjoy certain science fiction than it is for the more knowledgeable folks? ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/64 "2013-07-29T19:50:54Z")
> [@Red\_Wiggler](#): > > That’s an interesting question in and of itself – is it easier for those of us relatively unencumbered by a great deal of scientific knowledge to enjoy certain science fiction than it is for the more knowledgeable folks? I don’t think first-rate storytelling depends on a factual basis. Whether it’s the most prosaic life-in-Manhattan-June-2013 story or the wildest Vonnegut fantasia, a good story is a good story. I think “playing by the rules” is essential, though, whether the author chooses common, factual rules or makes up his own. Authors that just make up irrelevant stuff to fill a gap will never write a first-class story. Heinlein did better than most on this count, most of the time, even with his straight-out fantasies. If you’re going to hate, say, “All You Zombies” because your knowledge of physics precludes time travel, so be it. But don’t blame the writer. ---
**Author:** ![vontsira](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/51bf81/32.png) [@vontsira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vontsira)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/65 "2013-07-29T20:52:12Z")
Red Wiggler writes: “That’s an interesting question in and of itself – is it easier for those of us relatively unencumbered by a great deal of scientific knowledge to enjoy certain science fiction than it is for the more knowledgeable folks?” > [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > I don’t think first-rate storytelling depends on a factual basis. Whether it’s the most prosaic life-in-Manhattan-June-2013 story or the wildest Vonnegut fantasia, a good story is a good story. > > I think “playing by the rules” is essential, though, whether the author chooses common, factual rules or makes up his own. Authors that just make up irrelevant stuff to fill a gap will never write a first-class story. Heinlein did better than most on this count, most of the time, even with his straight-out fantasies. > > If you’re going to hate, say, “All You Zombies” because your knowledge of physics precludes time travel, so be it. But don’t blame the writer. I’d feel that for the scientifically erudite, a lot depends on the famous and oft-quoted capacity for the “willing suspension of disbelief”. People are variously-and-assortedly better or worse at that manoeuvre, and it depends IMO on the way you happen to be made or “wired”. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/66 "2013-07-29T23:03:41Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **Sam Stone** : > > I think it’s disliked to a certain degree by some because it’s one of the few Heinlein novels that doesn’t get the physics quite right - I don’t think Heinlein ever quite got his head around some of the nuances of relativity. That’s it for me. I can get past the bad relativity in _Citizen of the Galaxy_ or _Methuselah’s Children_, because in both of those, the relativistic bits are basically incidental to the plot. In _Time for the Stars_, though, the relativity is front-and-center, and so it’s jarring when he again gets it wrong. ---
**Author:** ![K364](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k364/32/5_2.png) [@K364](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/K364)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/67 "2013-07-30T01:40:20Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > … > I think it’s disliked to a certain degree by some because it’s one of the few Heinlein novels that doesn’t get the physics quite right - I don’t think Heinlein ever quite got his head around some of the nuances of relativity. > … Can someone explain what wasn’t “quite right” about the physics of TFTS? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/68 "2013-07-30T02:12:02Z")
He had the correct formulas. However, absolutely everything about the application of those formulas was twisted beyond recognition. Basically, he so deeply misunderstood relativity that he used the formulas associated with it to come to conclusions that are exactly opposite of the very fundamental principles from which those formulas are derived. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/69 "2013-07-30T02:27:19Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > A couple of years later and I stand by my list in Post #7. > > With the passage of time, I will admit that I reread _To Sail Beyond the Sunset_ every now and then. > > Don’t judge me. What I enjoyed most about that book is the literary picture of life in the American rural Midwest in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. Heinlein’s nostalgia for his own childhood, no doubt. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/70 "2013-07-30T02:29:40Z")
> [@Red\_Wiggler](#): > > That’s an interesting question in and of itself – is it easier for those of us relatively unencumbered by a great deal of scientific knowledge to enjoy certain science fiction than it is for the more knowledgeable folks? Probably depends on where the story falls on the [Mohs Scale of Science Fiction Hardness](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness). ---
**Author:** ![The\_Peyote\_Coyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f8ce5/32.png) [@The\_Peyote\_Coyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Peyote_Coyote)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/71 "2013-07-30T18:19:28Z")
I, too, will feed the zombie. I think these are this best: _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress Double Star Glory Road The Past Through Tomorrow The Unpleasant Profession of Johnathon Hoag_ Of the juveniles I think: _Tunnel in the Sky, Farmer in the Sky, Citizen of the Galaxy, The Rolling Stones_, and \*The Star Beast \*are the best. I also like _Space Cadet, Between Planets_, and \*Have Space Suit – Will Travel \*quite a bit. \*Starship Troopers \*is pretty good and it’s rare that a novel is still controversial 50 years after publican. \*The Puppet Masters \*is decent and has one of the best lead paragraphs ever written. The first half of \*Orphans of the Sky \*is “Universe,” a Science Fiction Hall of Fame novella. It’s well worth reading. “Waldo” sucks canal water, but “Magic, Inc.” is pretty entertaining. \*Assignment in Eternity \*contains “Lost Legacy,” which is his take on Atlantis and a pretty good fantasy, and “Jerry Was a Man,” which is a hoot ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/72 "2013-07-30T18:25:51Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ is quite possibly the best science fiction novel ever written by anyone. I’d say it’s Heinlein’s best, and certainly one of the best SF novels ever. But I gotta admit that as I grow older and crankier (who, me? ;)), his botch of basic probability in _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ bothers me more and more. They start off with a one-in-seven chance of pulling off The Revolution, but the odds against them get steadily steeper for no apparent reason. Heinlein’s explanation, through Mike, is that the fact that they’re taking _necessary_ risks doesn’t change the fact that they’re _risks._ Nice, but: either those risks were baked in from the beginning, in which case the fact that they’re about to roll the dice in a way they would have expected to have to do, even if all went well, which shouldn’t change the current odds against them; or they’re having to take additional risks due to things having gone wrong along the way, which should have been reflected in the plot. But the only thing that goes badly for them between the time Manny, Mike, Prof, and Wyoh declare the Revolution, and the time Manny, Prof, and Stu go to Earth is their failure in finding Earthside contacts, which their friendship with Stu rectifies. But instead of the odds having been somewhat _shorter_ than 6-1 against (another gripe: Heinlein has his characters use “one in seven” and “seven to one” interchangeably) at the point where they’re readying their trip to Earth, which would have made sense, they’re over 100-1 against. This of course makes no sense at all, probabilistically speaking. And this is from a guy who famously said, “Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best, he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear his shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house.” Oops. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/73 "2013-07-30T18:50:08Z")
My libertarian friends kept telling me I needed to read ScFi books by Robert Heinlein. “Start with _The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress_. You’ll love it!” So I bought _The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress_ and started reading it. God, how _ **awful** _. The author spends \*way \*too much time explaining technical crap and ignores the story. I made it half way through the book and gave up on it. Guess I’m just not a Heinlein fan. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2013, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/74 "2013-07-30T19:46:45Z")
Yeah, the probability thing in _Mistress_ bothers me, too. I can only really give it one of two different fanwanks: 1: The original calculation had baked into it a chance of a miracle happening, some sort of sudden unexpected event which would greatly improve the Loonies’ situation. The longer they went without seeing such a miracle, the less likely it was to happen. On the other hand, though, it should also have baked in the chance of _bad_ miracles, and every day that goes by without one of those is a good thing. 2: Mike was lying to the others, to motivate them. He knew enough human psychology to figure that they’d try harder once they became 100-to-1 underdogs than they would if they knew the true odds. Still annoying that none of the intelligent characters called him on it, though-- Maybe Prof was in cahoots in tricking Manny that way, but Manny was no slouch on mathematics, either. ---
**Author:** ![vontsira](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/51bf81/32.png) [@vontsira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vontsira)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2013, 8:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/75 "2013-07-31T08:15:53Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > My libertarian friends kept telling me I needed to read ScFi books by Robert Heinlein. “Start with _The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress_. You’ll love it!” > > So I bought _The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress_ and started reading it. God, how _ **awful** _. The author spends \*way \*too much time explaining technical crap and ignores the story. I made it half way through the book and gave up on it. > > Guess I’m just not a Heinlein fan. 😛 I was bored by _The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress_. A reaction which I ascribe to Heinlein having been fascinated by politics and politicking, which I am not. ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2013, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/76 "2013-08-01T15:29:01Z")
> [@vontsira](#): > > I feel similarly, about _Time For The Stars_. Two dis-recommendations, one recommendation, and no mention of the book otherwise. > > I like best, (many of) Heinlein’s stand-alone novels / “juveniles”, and would suggest same to a new reader. _TFTS_ is one of my four or five top favourites among those. I wonder why many readers seemingly find it wanting? _Time For the Stars_ didn’t grab me. I don’t know why. It’s a perfectly fine story, but somehow lacks flavor. Maybe because the lead is a telepath, and not the everyboy more common to the other juveniles. I can relate to being Kip Russel, but not a telepathic twin. ---
**Author:** ![krick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ebca7d/32.png) [@krick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/krick)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/77 "2013-09-15T03:04:00Z")
> [@MsBatt](#): > > “The Number of the Beast” is the very first book I EVER failed to finish. In fact, I slogged on to within 50 pages of the end, and threw the book in the garbage in disgust. That one is a tough read. I finished it but I’m looking forward to re-reading it at some point. I read Heinlein’s books all out of order and missed a few “important” ones, so I think that it will be more enjoyable the second time around after I’ve filled in the gaps. > [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > So I bought _The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress_ and started reading it. God, how _ **awful** _. The author spends \*way \*too much time explaining technical crap and ignores the story. I made it half way through the book and gave up on it. I’m sorry to hear that. It really is one of his best books. Maybe you’ll give it a chance again some day. I had trouble reading “Time Enough for Love”. I started it probably six or so times and kept losing interest in the first chapter or two. Eventually, I pushed through and it clicked. I couldn’t put it down and I read it straight through. I actually cried at one point while reading it, which is something that’s never happened to me before while reading a book. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/78 "2013-09-15T03:23:09Z")
> [@](#): > > I actually cried at one point while reading it, During the Tale of the Adopted Daughter, I assume. That book is like a very small painting set in a very wide and ornate frame… But the painting is a masterpiece. And I’ve heard it posited (by **Fenris** , I think) that _Number of the Beast_ was written deliberately bad, as an object example of all of the things not to do when writing. ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/79 "2013-09-15T03:30:41Z")
When she died a part of me died. I stopped wanting to live forever. ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088/80 "2013-09-15T04:55:46Z")
\*Time Enough For Love \*is my favorite because the “Tale of the Adopted Daughter” does take a little time to try and explain what a thousand year old person would have to go through with relationships, again and again. When Dora hears the geese over the house as she is dying, it brings a tear to my eye each time. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-robert-heinlein-books-are-the-best/602088.md?page=5)