[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by dwanthny

The expressed anger by the girl in your class over words written about a half a century ago is equivalent to someone taking offense to the language of Huckleberry Finn and labeling the book racist even though the book for its time was clearly anything but racist.

She certainly could have been disappointed and given what we know today confused that large parts of society may have believed that statement in the past. But her anger was not justified and should have been abated quickly in the ensuing discussion.

I very much disagree here. Her anger was definitely justified. To put it simply, in this case wrong is wrong, no matter what time period that comes from. And when the book is put forth in a class as revered by the '60s culture (or counter-culture if you will), that definitely opens it up to greater criticism. Why would a whole generation hold a book in reverence when it says something so terrible?

Standing up in front of 300 people, being brave enough to go against the grain, and make the statement the girl did... that's exactly how society changes its beliefs. We need more "angry" people like her if things are to be further changed!

This novel was written in the 50s and like it or not this was mainstream ignorance in the 50s. Today we can easily say that we would drop 9 out of 10 offenders down the bottomless pit and the other 1 might be questionable for many reasons.

Do you have evidence that this was mainstream ignorance at the time? It certainly may have been, but I'm curious if it really was.

I certainly don't recall Asimov, Bradburry, Clarke, Lem, Anderson, Pohl, Tiptree Jr., Herbert, Campbell, or any other Golden Ager -- contemporaries of Heinlein -- ever making such a suggestion, or anything even close. Especially when the suggestions looks very much to be something conveyed as an actual belief the author holds.

As I said, in this case, wrong is wrong.

Times change, society learns. This quote from one book of fiction is not "A very, very dangerous suggestion" for its time. In hindsight this statement was wrong, but not "a totally irresponsible statement."

The very reason society changes is because people like that girl in my class stand up and say "this is wrong!"

And, yeah, it was an irresponsible statement, even if it were a cultural idea. As I argued previously, Heinlein is conveying this as wisdom, not just some belief that happened to be misguided, but actually as a wise conclusion. This is emphasized even more by putting it into the mouth of a woman in the setting of teaching our main character. That just pours insult onto injury, and why I say it's "totally irresponsible."

Old-school scumbag? Maybe. But I don't think so and would recommend any of his books to fans of science fiction.

For me, I'd change "maybe" to "definitely" and "would recommend" to "would never recommend."

Next thing I know someone (not you) might suggest that Huckleberry Finn (racist as it is) shouldn't be allowed read in any school.

The thread is about science fictions we should never read. We are all suggesting these authors should not be read. Just about every single post in this thread. Why, then, aren't you taking issue with others who complain about Lem, Harrison, or Ringo? There's really no difference, except I gave a morally irresponsible quote as justification for my aversion to Heinlein. If you're going to make the leap that my argument might lead to censoring Huck Finn, why not argue that this whole thread in general will lead to the same?

Originally Posted by radius

That said, I still think you are mis-reading. Even if we grant that this is what RAH personally believed, and not what his character believes (which I am not ready to grant), whether he is to be censured (emphasis Pie's) for saying that depends on what causes rape.

Radius, I appreciate your response... even though I cut it all out!

Instead of repeating myself, I just wanted to point to my above paragraph. I am not suggesting Heinlein being "censured" any more than any other post in this thread directed at other authors. I could just as easily have said "Robert Jordan, stay away" and said "he's boring and pedantic and overrated" as justification, and don't see that as any different than my cry of "Robert Heinlein, run... run away... and don't look back!"

-Pie