>> Heinlein’s 1959 novel Stranger in a Strange Land, which owned a species of cult-status through the 1970s, can be read today only with vicarious embarrassment.
>The reviewer dislikes this genre. OK. But it's like sending someone who hates horror to review a history of horror movies. The review tends to say more about the reviewer than the subject.
I grew up reading Heinlein. I've read it all; the short stories, the juveniles, the late-period novels, the early and late nonfiction essays, the recently published "lost" works. I consider him and Asimov among my formative influences.
I very much agree that Stranger can only be read with vicarious embarrassment.
>The reviewer dislikes this genre. OK. But it's like sending someone who hates horror to review a history of horror movies. The review tends to say more about the reviewer than the subject.
I grew up reading Heinlein. I've read it all; the short stories, the juveniles, the late-period novels, the early and late nonfiction essays, the recently published "lost" works. I consider him and Asimov among my formative influences.
I very much agree that Stranger can only be read with vicarious embarrassment.