I'm pretty much of the opinion that Heinlein rocked, but I really started reading him in college, after I had gotten a huge influx of history, politics, and social history in my brain. I was more intrigued by the ideas and wordplay and references he threw in to things I found that others thought were really obscure. Also, placing him in the proper context as to what was going on in the mainstream writing world, he was always trying to go beyond what (most) others were doing. He just wanted to wrote for himself and people liked what he wrote.

In fact, it is quite evident in his posthumous book "Grumbles from the Grave" that he had to deal with a lot of petty self-styled arbiters of "what is proper" in some of his stories, particularly the juvies. I never dwelled on if his characters were "realistic," or not, as I tend to accept behavior of an odd character to simply be a character trait or a staple of pulp novels of the time. As he got older and as usual in ill health, he started tying as many of his stories and plotlines together, to irregular success. I shrug off a lot for a good story. I enjoy his writing "voice" and often got caught up in the plots. But then again, I also read the entire Lensmen series by Doc Smith, and those had a really dense sentence structure.

I guess I view his work sort of as a Dirk Gently-style Holistic way. Some do not stand up over time, but at the time they were printed many were cutting edge in ideas and execution.

For instance, I was told Stranger in a Strange Land was the first Science Fiction novel to make the NYT bestseller list? That's baffling to me.

t /off the cuff rambling

The movie is filled with shots of Jennifer Connolly in a white t-shirt and no bra getting Sprayed Down with Various Liquids. This makes her Slippery and Difficult to Rescue when she keeps clumsily getting herself caught by Enemy Mashers.

I'm thinking 50-50 this was probably sarcasm, but thank you anyway, because now Jennifer Connolly is romping around my brain in a wet T-shirt.

Now I'm off to read "Barrel Bear" - this is turning out to be a really good day.

I was pretty much kidding. But

I think the theatre is scheduled for completion in January, 2028.

That gives us plenty of time to come up with our infiltration mission scenario. Clearly, we'll need SCUBA gear for the moat but I'm a little concerned about humping it over the gates.

Maybe we should drop in from a helicopter. I know a guy.

Betsy's right. The juveniles, I think, hold up best of all, because they aren't hampered by Heinlein's attempts to wedge in his concepts about politics and gender relations. They're almost all about the story, and when he was at his best, he told great stories.

I do still love The Green Hills of Earth. Makes me sniffly.

I tried to do something clever here, but just got a blank screen. I guess that might say something about me. Have a great evening all. I'm out to enjoy the sweltering heat we're having here (81 degrees. Eek!)

It is true that Heinlein was all about the big idea, which is really true of many of the early "masters" of the genre, including Asimov, Clarke, del Ray, Clement and Van Vogt. It was all about envisioning the future, and when he was at his best, no one did that better than Heinlein. He could also tell a great story. As others have said, the best of them are the juveniles, which are rarely muddled by politics; his very weird views of women and sex; and his dire need of an editor in the later books. My recommendations would be Space Cadet (1948) through Glory Road (1963), skipping the truly appalling Podkayne of Mars. Then forget he wrote anything else and try not to think too much about Stranger in a Strange Land. I still reread the juveniles every couple of years. Certainly anyone who read Heinlein wouldn't have had the "why are there horses in space?" reaction to Firefly. Many of his books have a mix of high and low technology and he talks about the fact that horses can make more horses, while tractors can't make more tractors.

And The Green Hills of Earth and The Man Who Sold the Moon both make me sniffly.

The only Heilein books I have read are Stranger and Glory Road. I loved Glory Road. Was kind of "Eh" on Stranger. I have one male friend who thinks it's the greatest book ever (and another female friend who adores it) but found a disturbing parallel between his girlfriends reading it upon his insistance and them breaking up with him shortly thereafter. The only one who didn't fall into that cycle is now his wife, and she is, upon reflection, rather close to the stereotypical Heinlein woman referred to earlier in this thread.

Yeah, I wouldn't be opposed to reading other Heinlein ... in fact, I have a strange suspicion I've read at least one. Moon just didn't do it for me. But I'ma mark some of the recs here.

Glory Road is interesting in that it's a somewhat traditional fantasy story done sci-fi. It's probably been at least 5 years, I really should read it again because I don't remember much beyond that I enjoyed it.

I think Tim's version will actually be, you know, good. Whereas mine is, you know, sleazy.

I can't believe no one said this yet but, do you really think these two things are mutually exclusive?