Heinlein vs. VerhoevenstevekelnerDecember 7 2011, 04:13:16 UTC
Given that not only did Verhoeven profoundly misunderstand Heinlein's novel, which was decidedly antifascist in its own right (ANY form of Federal Service entitled you to a vote, not just the military, which had expanded due to the Bug War), but went out of his way to "satirize" this novel (and dis it frequently in the media) based on his false interpretation, thus insulting Heinlein AND the work, I don't even consider it worthy of the name it stole. It really has nothing to do with Heinlein's intent or story other than a few shared names. It missed the central theme, the sociological speculation, and the technological innovation. Forget it. And for those who don't know, the book was originally intended as one of his juveniles for Scribner's, which is why it reads much less adult and perhaps overly naive -- it was by explicit authoral intent. Heinlein's editor, who hated him, his work, and SF in general (he said), rejected this book, which broke his contract and therefore allowed him to sell it to another house. He did not bother to rewrite it for a different audience -- and why should he, by one of his own laws of writing?
And for those who don't know, the book was originally intended as one of his juveniles for Scribner's, which is why it reads much less adult and perhaps overly naive -- it was by explicit authoral intent. Heinlein's editor, who hated him, his work, and SF in general (he said), rejected this book, which broke his contract and therefore allowed him to sell it to another house. He did not bother to rewrite it for a different audience -- and why should he, by one of his own laws of writing?
Reply
Leave a comment