Customer Reviews

Stranger in a Strange Land

5 star:		(358)
4 star:		(80)
3 star:		(96)
2 star:		(61)
1 star:		(59)

 

 

Reviewing Stranger in a Strange Land is quite a challenge. Is it the best science fiction novel ever published? I would say yes. Is it my favorite? No; it's not even my favorite Heinlein novel. To add a little more irony to the pot, Heinlein himself insisted that the book is not really science fiction to begin with. Stranger really marks a huge turning point in Heinlein's career. Unhappy with the brand of "juvenile" writer and the editing that position constantly entailed, Heinlein was determined to write a truly adult novel, one with no taboos, no limits, and no restrictions of any kind. With Stranger in a Strange Land he accomplished that in spades, basically taking on the heretofore sacrosanct subjects of sexuality and religion. Heinlein was not sure that anyone would even publish this story that took him 12 years to write; what was published was a mere figment of the original manuscript, 60,000 words having been cut out. Even though Heinlein did the editing himself, it had to have felt like jabbing an ice pick into his own heart to do it. Thankfully, we can now read the complete, original manuscript the way Heinlein intended the story to be told.

The plot is deceptively simple. The first manned mission to Mars never made it home to Earth. The second mission, twenty years later, found Valentine Michael Smith, an infant born on Mars and the only surviving member of the ill-fated first mission. Having been raised by Martians, Smith is literally a stranger in a strange land when he is brought back to earth with "miraculous" abilities and a Martian philosophy of life. The Federation government basically hides him away from prying eyes, partly in fear of the legal and political dangers posed by his unique status. Having been raised by Martians, the human experience is completely new and rather frightening to him. He has never even met a woman until nurse Jill Boardman sneaks into his room to get a glimpse of him. Fearful that the government is going to keep Michael basically imprisoned (or worse), Jill helps sneak him out of the hospital, and the two of them end up at the home of Jubal Harshaw. Jubal is an outspoken, older man who lives a thoroughly individual lifestyle, but he commits himself to helping Michael escape his perilous situation. Michael quickly begins to absorb human knowledge and, less quickly, begins to understand the confusing mentality of human beings.

Halfway through the novel, you may be asking yourself why the book was so controversial; the answer becomes clear as Michael now steps out into the wider world. He and Jill move around incognito, and Michael learns more about people. After a stint as an unsuccessful magician, he eventually decides to become a preacher. He's not preaching a religion, though; he offers humans a new way of living and thinking, one based on the Martian system he grew up in. This new lifestyle involves a lot of nudity, a lot of open fornication, and the constant repetition of a mantra of sorts naming yourself and those around you God. The "I am God, you are God" theme is essentially Heinlein's means of emphasizing the personal responsibility of each individual for his own life. It is not strictly antireligious, but certainly it is not an idea that would go over well among most fundamentalists. I say most because I am a fundamentalist myself, but I understand what Heinlein was saying and recognize the fact that, after all, this is fiction. Frankly, though, the free love theme bothers my sensibilities and causes my viewpoint of the novel to change somewhat. Even though disapproval began to temper my enthusiasm toward the end, I certainly cannot give this book less than five stars.

Science fiction readers had never read anything quite like Stranger back in 1961; its originality, bold themes, and fearless writing hit with the force of a hurricane, and science fiction has never been quite the same. The Hugo Award this novel rightfully won barely begins to give it the honor and acclaim it deserves. I cannot recommend this novel highly enough, albeit I must enclose a caveat with my endorsement. This book has the power to shock readers even today; do not let your own beliefs take away from the wonder to be found in the pages of this novel. Stranger requires and deserves a completely open mind from anyone who would approach it; it also requires multiple readings to even begin to plumb the depths of its riches.

Anyone wanting to understand and get a true appreciation of the genius of Robert Heinlein really must read Stranger, but I would not recommend picking this book up before you have sampled some of Heinlein's other wares. It would be a real shame to let any adverse emotional reaction to the themes of this novel deprive you of the joy and wonder to be found in countless other Heinlein stories and novels.

This novel was way ahead of its time in many ways, and yes, stuck in the 50s in other ways. Reading some people's negative reviews here has been amusing.

Most of them presume that Heinlein was writing from their 90s or post-2000 perspective for some insane reason. Take note: He wrote this *before* the so called "free-love" movement had become widespread in the 60s. Take further note: The water-brother mini-society he created in the novel wasn't "free-love" at all, but had a quite high barrier to entry.

Other negative posters are clearly unable to escape their ethnocentric viewpoint, finding the relationships constructed by Heinlein to be distasteful based on their societal values. If you are unable to think about a society that practices polyamory without feeling embarassment or nausea, or really think that it is simply "unnatural", then don't read this book. (...)

Most of all, remember this is science fiction. It's intended to portray an alternate reality, and I think it does a fine job of that while satirizing our reality at the same time. I could go on about other particulars of the book, but I won't: In short, this is one of the finest books ever written.

When I first picked up _Stranger in a Strange Land_ I wasn't expecting much. I had read _Starship Troopers_ and _The Puppet Masters_ and thought they were O.K. But this book just blew me away. Not so much because of its science fiction extrapolations, but rather for how funny, intelligent and true the book rang. _Stranger..._ shows human beings through the eyes of one Valentine Michael Smith, a Martian with human origins. He is so child-like, so innocent, so funny and calm in every situation even though he has such awesome powers--it's amazing to read about him. Along with Gully Foyle, in _The Stars My Destination_ I think he is one of the best SF protagonists ever written. And the way he learns and evolves from the strange cast of human characters--I also really liked Patty and Jubal Harshaw--is wonderful to read. The ending is so unforgettable. And how Heinlein came up with such a cool word like grok I'll never know. Also, he brings the interesting concept of water brothers into the story, and shows how humanity should love each other without resorting to meaningless violence. Sometimes Heinlein gets a bit too wordy and some of his views about God and woman I find hard to swallow--I can see why this book is so controversial. But aside from those minor flaws, _Strange..._ is a great book to read not only because it is enjoyable by itself as literature, but also because it has the intelligence and audacity to pose such difficult questions and firm beliefs about humanity, God and our place in the universe when now such concerns are ignored by most current SF.

I won't go so far as to say that this is the greatest work of fiction ever written - it is not. It suffers on several counts, not least of which is that it marks the real beginning of Heinlein's later descent into rambling on at too great a length propounding on the benefits of free love at the expense of gripping storytelling.

That said, it nevertheless earns 5 stars not just for its well-deserved place near the top of the SF pantheon of 'must reads' but on its merits. This is no mere rayguns-and-aliens space opera and as such it was, in and of itself, also a contributor to a fundamental shift in the nature of all SF published afterward. I don't think it's going to far to say that this book reshaped the genre permanently.

One thing is certain: If you haven't read this book - or much of what Heinlein wrote after - it is very different form what you're expecting. At times it seems a simple enough story. But by taking Micheal Valentine Smith and raising him in an alien culture, Heinlein is able to draw out much of what it means to be human - his main character, after all, is an alien human who must learn for himself how his fellows work to try to fit in among them. A monumental endeavour for its time and no less relavent today. And, at the risk of repeating myself, this effort continues to this day in much of the better SF being published. The newer takes on the subject may not agree with Heinlein's point of view on the nature of humanity, but they cannot ignore it and in many ways they owe their ability to approach the issue in print to this book.

So, it's important. Does that also translate into a good read? Yes, it most certainly does. This novel is packed with fun and interesting characters interacting with panache and an ever-present hint of heresy that stimulates the mind to explore new ground even as it makes you laugh and/or nod your head in fervent agreement.

So, if you're a fan of SF you need to read this book not only b/c no SF collection is complete without it but also b/c it's great fun.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Heinlein conceived STRANGER in 1948, but didn't finish it until
1960. His editor asked him to cut it from 220,000 to 150,000 words; as
published it was 160,087. It was reissued from the original
manuscript in 1991, and I just got around to reading this "uncut"
edition. I first read STRANGER in the early sixties -- it's the only
"major" Heinlein I'd never reread (unless you count _To Sail the
Sunset Sea_ as major).

STRANGER hasn't aged well. Ostensibly set in the 21st century, it
reads like the 1950's. News commentators are "winchells" and
"lippmans" -- I recognize the names, but remember nothing else
about the originals; do you? The bad guys and minor characters are
purest cardboard. Women ("bims") have the "liberty permitted cats
and favorite children"; homosexuals are "poor in-betweeners". The
world beyond the USA is almost invisible.

Jubal Harshaw, the writer, patriarch and "father of all", is a self-
indulgent know-it-all given to long, hectoring speeches. The
women are quick to shed clothing and inhibitions, and couple with
any water-brother. They grow younger, more beautiful -- and more
exhibitionist -- as they learn Martian mind-control. Feh.

And yet, and yet .... STRANGER still works as a novel -- I reread it
pretty much at one go. The idea of a child raised from infancy by an
alien race ... Valentine Michael Smith's journey from innocence to
full humanity to New Messiah ... the cheerfully crass
commercialism of the Church of Foster ... the silly-but-serious
mysticism ... Heinlein, whatever his flaws, was a master story-
teller.

STRANGER was Heinlein's first crossover bestseller, becoming
something of a Sixties icon -- peace & love, y'know. Bits and pieces
were taken up in pop music and culture: "Discorporate, and you'll
be free", urged the Mothers of Invention. Grace Slick of the
Jefferson Airplane sang of "sister-lovers, water-brothers". The
ability to grok was briefly important, if mostly forgotten now.

Should you read, or reread, STRANGER? Mmmph. I don't regret
doing so, but the book stays pretty low in my mental ranking of
Heinlein novels. And if I were you, I'd hunt up the earlier edition --
the restored 70,000 words add little but bulk to the story.

Happy reading--
Peter D. Tillman

Review copyright 1999 by Peter D. Tillman

Folks, let's be clear here -- if you don't like "Stranger" but do like other Heinlein the odds are great you've never read the uncut version. I won't go into details (you can find them easily on the net) but essentially the cut down version is not written in Heinlein's "voice" but drastically cut down (by RAH) to fit into a length the publisher thought proper.

And so it does not sound like any other Heinlein novel, and this has split the "Stranger" camp right down the middle. There are those to whom the original book was bible -- and those tend not to like other Heinlein works. Those of us who love Heinlein have always felt kind of "meh" about Stranger... until the uncut version was released (in 1991).

Now, the Kindle version being sold is the cut version, so if you were a fan of that (published in 1961) you'll love this version. However, if you are not a huge fan of that version I would stay away from this Kindle version at all costs (there are easily found web versions of the uncut novel -- I'm not advocating piracy, but it's unlikely we'll ever see a Kindle uncut version as Amazon seems clueless here -- even official reviewers seem to think this version is uncut, but I can promise you it isn't, as the passages are clear and easy to find in even the sample version).

One last thing -- if you have read the cut version (either this Kindle version or otherwise) you might want to give the uncut version a try. Also, if you are new to Heinlein and want to know what all the fuss is about, definitely read the uncut version. Watered down beer tastes just like that.

I loved the book when I first bought it in paperback years ago. I bought the Un-Edited version and as thrilled. I recently bought this version and found out it is the edited version where many parts have been chopped out or changed. I requested my money back and I was thrilled Amazon complied. I told them that this is not the same book that the kindle's book description claims it is. DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK IF YOU WANT THE UNEDITED VERSION!!!

The first half of the book is very interesting, although it already appears sexist just in the highly unbalanced ratio of speech. Male characters pontificate on and on about whatever subject and are always "teaching" women. This alone did not bother me too much, and the story was interesting. However, the author makes a huge early investment in Ben's character, just to later move him into nearly complete nothingness, and basically replace his role with that of Jubal, who pontificates ad nauseum just as Ben did. This feels clunky, as if he got tired of Ben's character and, rather than reworking Ben into someone else, or distributing his speeches among other characters, just replaced him with the nearly identical character of Jubal and forgot to kill or do away with Ben with a good (or any) explanation. This is mildly annoying and just doesn't feel very expertly done.

Then, the story shifts and starts going into free love, and that too is fine. I enjoy cultural relativism and get that part of the perspective offered in the book. I also understand its place and appeal when the book was written. However, there is a bit of a ridiculous sexist paradox in the story: the author basically preaches that everyone who is not evil is equally worthy and has God in themselves, and that everyone should love everyone freely... Except homosexuals. Indeed, the messiah of the book would probably "sense a wrongness in them" and not share water with them. WTF!!! I am heterosexual and have no dog in that fight, and even then this seems vastly hypocritical to me, particularly when couched in this whole free love preachery context. Then, to top it off, the author goes on to say that "9 out of 10 times, when a woman gets raped it's her own fault". Of course, this is very "smoothly" said by a woman. Please. I will continue to listen to this in hopes that I am just not missing some crucial turn around or valuable message that my liberal upbringing, my interest in cultural relativism, and my 22 years of formal education and PhD. candidacy have not helped me see so far, in which case I will update this review in order to do it justice. But in my humble opinion, despite my love for literature and scifi, and self-labeled open mind, so far this is looking like a paradoxical, hypocritical sexist joke covered up in a moderately interesting plot with a very interesting (but apparently homophobic) main character, and a not so interesting at all sidekick who thinks that women cause themselves to be raped.

When I first read "Stranger..." over thirty years ago in junior high school, I enjoyed it, though perhaps no more than many of the other Sci-Fi books I was reading at the time. It was good, but a bit overdone, I thought; I preferred a good shoot-em-up like "Starship Troopers" or "Glory Road". What do 14 year olds know?

Some years ago a new edition was released that was reportedly a restored manuscript, closer to what Heinlein had intended, so I bought a copy and promptly put it aside for ten years. Eventually I picked it up which cleaning house and started to read it again. Much better the second time, as I could better appreciate Heinlein's parodies and critiques, and his shots at government and institutions.

But midway though I was struck by a number of Heinlein's plot elements. World governments... black helicopers... martians.... I suddenly realized that all the contemporary paranoid theories, all the modern conspiracies, all were, in fact, drawn from this book! I couldn't believe it. I was laughing so hard, I was crying.

All these very serious people watching "X Files" and swearing up and down that it's all true- do they know they're repeating stories from a 40 year old SciFi book?

I think Heinlein would have been proud.

This novel is probably Heinlein's most famous work. It was first published in 1961 and I think this fact is significant. Sometimes, literature does not age well. Heinlein has written other novels (e.g. "Starship Troopers" was published in 1959; still highly relevant; read my review of it) that have aged much better than this, so you may want to read one or two of his other novels before you decide whether or not you like his work.

The novel is divided into four sections that have titles that remind me of a biography of a saint or some other sort of religious figure. Part 1 is called "His Maculate Origin." Part Two is called, "His Preposterous Heritage." Part Three is called, "His Eccentric Education." Part Four is called, "His Scandalous Career." Lastly, Part Five is called, "His Happy Destiny." This gives the reader some hint about where Heinlein is taking the story and as such is somewhat helpful.

I agree with another reviewer that the initial premise of the book is very interesting both as a plot device and as a story. Michael Valentine Smith (he is the "Stranger" in a strange land) is a human raised on Mars; he is biologically human but philosophically Martian. Native Martians are never physically described but there are some hints about how their society is set up. Due to some interesting legal decisions, it is discovered the Michael is heir to a vast fortune and that he is possibly the ruler of Mars. Initially, Michael finds human culture enormously difficult to understand. However, he manages to get some help. He carries out talks with the politicians and has his rights secured.

The ideas in the novel were no doubt very popular in the 1960s. Michael stresses what might be called free love, pantheism (e.g. all his disciples create each other with the phrase "Thou Art God"), religious pluralism and an incredible optimism that heaven can be created on Earth. There is also a dose of Heinleins trademark libertarianism in some of Michaels views. In part Four, Michael starts up a religious institution to teach people the Martian language and the Martian way of doing things. However, as other reviewers have said, by this point, the novel seems to degenerate into a soapbox for Heinlein to voice his ideas. The way that Heinlein argues for religious pluralism is extremely weak sophistry likewise for his arguments in favor of some sort of "new sexuality" where sex bonds all sorts of different people, with no apparent rules. There is no explicit homosexuality but the new sexual morality proposed would probably admit it.

Understanding the "message" of the novel is a little tricky. There are some valid observations about how religious institutions are founded and sustained. Indeed, the Fosterite Church strikes me as the ultimate American religion. It combines the "new" revelation (an idea that Mormonism and Jehovahs Witnesses use), an overwhelming emphasis on Happiness and it is extremely emotional. While there was potential for examining how Earth would react to the discovery of an alien race, it is not really explored. I think the message that Heinlein intended to communicate in the novel is that love, brotherhood etc can create a utopia but established interests will always prevent it from forming.

I personally found "Starship Troopers" a more interesting novel; the next Heinlein novel I read will probably be, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress." My overall impression is that this novels story starts out well but morphs into a soapbox and that it is overrated. Yet, keep in mind, it probably one of the most popular SF novels since World War 2 and most people have extremely polarized opinions about it.