15 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
its a Satire people. You just dont get it., March 12, 2010
Frankly I am SHOCKED at the poor reviews this book recieves.
There are two MINOR complaints I have about this book, one that the son's acceptance of his castration is a little too easy, could have had 2 or 3 sentences that would have made this more believable, either to set him up as a yes man (where he would do anything to get ahead) wich he did not seem to be; or to have him willing to do anything to be with mommy and make her happy (wich he was not when it came to talking about her drug problem etc).
The second minor complaint that I have is that I think the sign at the end of the book could have had more impact and shown the moral of the story or what the characters learned through their experiences more. Such as: books for barter was good but it should have listed other things wich would have underlined the story such as labor/work (underlying theme is that labor is virtue and sloth is evil), Training (self improvement is stressed, the value of knowledge), Durable goods (items saved from pre apocolipse = forthought and planning, Items manufactured post apocolipse = labor and skills) etc. Keep the bridge lessons as a insider joke but they could have had something about Be nice or leave- no intolorance will be tolorated etc to underline the anti racism message. I just feel like he diddnt wrap it all up in a nice polished way and that it was a missed oppertunity.
Ok now onto the positives.
This book is not racist. If you think it is you are completely missing the whole point and I kind of wonder if you really read the whole book. Im going to refute things in list form since there are so many points and they overlap.
people have claimed Racism because-
1. The Dark skinned overlords are Cannibals.
Cannibalism was practiced worldwide in history, and often by caucasians. Look it up in Wikipedia. Not to mention that Cannibalism is sprinkled throughout european mythology. So Yes cannibalism is a metaphor for barbarianism (no pun intended barbary pirates) but that is not nessicarily African or dark skinned barbarism and to assume that they are cannibals BECAUSE they are black is the readers being racist and missing the authors non racist point. He is showing how the Slaves are being treated as livestock. Eating them only drives this point home. Yes its shock value, but frankly its a shock the story needs so that people dont think to themselves "hey, true they arent free men (and women) but is it really so bad? The protagonist starts out (when he is captured) thinking "Ill just play allong for now..." and as things progressively get worse he thinks "ok this is bad but I should bide my time" untill he see's the furthest extreme wich is the cannibalism that shows how he is not just viewed as chattel but as cattle; thats when he finally thinks "I gotta get outta here no matter what happens... death is better than this!" We can accept castration as a outrageous but believable cultural norm for this society, why is everyone so outraged that the author chose cannibalism as a plot device? Plain and simple, people have a view of the stereotypical black boogieman cannibal (robinson crusoe, king kong etc) with bone through nose standing around a boiling cauldron of human soup or chasing the poor innocent white explorer with spears or dart guns to eat them. Keep in mind that this could instead be a aligory for a aristocracy that consumes the lower caste using them up completely with no regard for freedom or human life. Think Vlad the impaler or The Bloody countess, instead of the Cannibal bushman and the racist outcry becomes meaningless. PS people read a Modest Proposal by Swift Im sure you will hate it.
2. The black people are all Muslim, the book is anti Islam!
You need to put this into historical context. This book was published in 1964 the year Malcom x was assasinated. Islam was at that time viewed by many as the religion of the radicalized black extremists. As opposed the ML King message of love the sinner hate the sin of racism, Malcom X had a message of segregation and that White people were inherently oppressive, racist, and evil. The black panthers were predominantly muslim, and much of Africa southern Asia and
the middle east is muslim. It is only natural that the black culture in the story would have a muslim bent. But if you notice the protagonist says repeatedly that they are NOT true muslims, they belong to a bastardization of muslim beliefs and that he himself had read the koran and knew more true phillosophy of Mohhamed than they did and did not think that true muslims would approve of this warped Islam. Also if you read Stranger in a strange land you will see that the Author actually is fond of many religions including Islam and speaks well of it in terms of a idea but that he thinks the people who practice it dont often follow the idea as with all religions. Personally I disagree with the Author, I think all religion is a bad Idea.
3.The book uses the N word it must be racist!
So did Huckleberry Finn wich was why it was burned. The problem is that where the characters use the N word the author is showing that the character in question is either racist, or its the black character talking about how racist people treated him. So in fact by using the N word the author is in fact pointing out racism, and condemning it. Yes the N word makes me wince, part of me never wants to hear it or read it, but I dont believe in rewriting history to only keep the nice shiny happy bits, if I believed that I would be a holocaust denier. As a white person I especially should understand and condemn racism, and without confronting it how would I understand why it was bad? The (black) character Joseph uses the N word in a sentence where he is saying you (white man protagonist) dont understand what its like to be a black man. Nore will we ever if we dont view the horrific effects of racism. The fact that it makes us wince shows us the bitter medicine is working.
4. The black men all rape the white women in the book, showing how the author thinks that Black men are all sex crazed and that white women are more desirable than black women etc. Its perpetuating the stereo type!
WRONG! How could you miss that this is DIRECT mirroring of how slaves were treated in the American South? Decreed to be sub-human but raped by their masters and the idea of a mixed child being abhorrant? This doesnt have to do with black men desiring white women, but as slave women being used for sex and treated as sub human. How could you not get that? Also the castration and the studding and eugenics breeding programs were also a part of American slavery. Its all in your history why dont you see it?
The same arguement can be applied for the lazy arguement, Slave masters are lazy, slaves were always running around trying to be productive. Drugs being a means of control etc. Its all a satire of history.
5. There is no good black character, Joseph character is a uncle tom etc.
No he proves that it is power that corrupts not upbringing. Joseph is a important character as he is the one who transforms the most. In the beginning he is a servant in the truest sense of the word, a free man but Bowing scraping and trying not to give offense. At the end he is the wealthy and powerful man who is willing to use people he called friends as cattle, and takes pleasure at retribution to his former "oppressors" when he gets the upper hand. Heinlein is saying that no one should weild that much power over another man, that even a good man will become a despot given too much control. He also says it when he says that no white man would have been any better if in the same position that the black leader was in.
At any rate this is getting long, I appologise, I can understand those who said it did not have a lot of character development or description, thats Heinleins style and some people dont like it. I can even understand people (kids) who found it boring, some people arent really readers when it comes to more challenging material. But please, please please... stop saying its racist.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
18 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Good read, June 3, 2001
After a bomb warning screaming from the Farnham household television, the family, along with their servant and a friend of their daughter's, rush down into their bomb shelter. They wait in fear at the world they will find upon emerging, but when they finally open the shelter, are amazed at the beautiful untouched world around them. After some adventuring, they find that they are in the same place as when they began, but the land remains untouched by human developement. They are seemingly alone in the newly beautiful world and become adapt to being self sufficient. Together, they plan to start a new civilization, until one day they are discovered. Taken and enslaved in the 'new world' where people of colour become the ruling class and the anglo's the slaves, they find that they somehow had been catapulted into the future. This new world is a place where people are born into certain classes, their futures being determined by birth. Much like the world we live in today, the people accept their places willingly and never question their status. Hugh Farnham, however, see's the injustices of this new world and devises a plan of escape. Although I'm not a huge science fiction fan, I really did enjoy 'Farnham's Freehold'. Heinlein weaves a clever little story with this book, and throws in a few neat twists at the end. Covering the issues of race, governing politics, and those of gender, he comes up with a really creative tale that is accessible to a wide audience. It's really worth a read.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
28 of 37 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Dated and disgusting; but not without merit., October 12, 1999
I am a sucker for any type of post-apocalytic story. Farnham's Freehold is this type of story. I really liked this book and also disliked it at the same time. Hugh and his family; wife, son, daughter, servant and a friend are caught by a nuclear surprise. They survive in Hugh's shelter; and are catapulted to a world in the future where all 'white' society has been obliterated, and black rule over whites. Slavery, studding, torture, castrating and cannabilism are the norm in this society.
These situations are not sensationalized but they are shocking.
Problems with book:
1. Not much character depth: The most truthful characters are Joseph the servant, and Hugh himself. The other characters are as followed: the drunken wife, a mama's boy, a daddy's girl and a sexy friend of daddy's girl.
2. Not scientific. I can buy how Hugh builds a well stocked shelter. I can buy how they got catapulted to the future. I can't buy how only black society survived. Certainly, the Chinese (more technologically advanced than Africa in 1962) or the Japanese would have survived also.
3. Disturbingly written. Cannabilism and torturing are disturbing actions. But they way in which it is written seems to be more shocking than the acts themselves.
Good points of book:
1. Stunningly adroit fable of racism. Slavery has visited every society, including the kinder, gentler and more responsible Masters.
2. Use of drug 'Happiness' to keep slaves happy and docile. Very reminscent Huxley's soma. Wise foreshadowing on how some believe illicit drugs are used to keep down the black man and other underclasses.
3. They way Hugh and Joseph are written. Hugh is over the top, a man who will do whatever it takes to survive while still having a moral compass. Joseph is everyman who is doing what he must to survive. The roles of Hugh and Joseph have flipped. Although Hugh is a fair and loving boss; Hugh does not even blame Joseph when he is placed in a position of authority.
If you read this book as SF you will be slightly disappointed.
If you read this book as a satire you will be impressed.
If this seems dichotomous, I don't care. I said I was a sucker for post-apocalyptic stories.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
