What are you reading?

[Megagun]

Just finished Niven & Pournelle's "Footfall". Very good. From the moment I first laid my eyes on the four pages of dramatis personae, I knew it was going to be pretty epic, but hoo-boy, that was a damned good epic book; and it never felt as if there were *too* many characters in there, and since every character knows at least two other characters, you won't easilly forget any of the characters, except maybe some of the aliens.

Before that, I finished Heinlein's Starship Troopers. Wow. That movie was indeed nothing like it, at all. A very interesting book, though I somehow missed all that controversialness about it.

Next up: Niven & Pournelle's "Lucifer's Hammer"

[Eth]

The Niven/Pournelle book that I really liked was Fallen Angels.  In a world where science (and science fiction) have been all-but outlawed, an underground network of SF fans must rescue an astronaut and find a way to return him to his home on a space station.  Lots of in-jokes!

[Lukipela]

Before that, I finished Heinlein's Starship Troopers. Wow. That movie was indeed nothing like it, at all. A very interesting book, though I somehow missed all that controversialness about it.

I had the same experience with that. I think the movie is pretty un, in an over the top, gung-ho action kind of way. The book on the other hand, contains some action but focuses a lot more on politics and philosophy. Pretty darned cool.

[fossaman]

I found the most interesting part of Starship Troopers to be the interpersonal dynamics in the military units. Politics on a small scale, I suppose, but Heinlein did a good job making them believable.

The only really controversial thing I can remember about that book was the stuff about suffrage and mandatory civil service (if I'm remembering that right). I suppose that might not sit well with some of the more liberal folks out there. Oh! And there was that stuff about corporal punishment for crimes.

[Bleeding Star]

Just finished Niven & Pournelle's "Footfall". Very good. From the moment I first laid my eyes on the four pages of dramatis personae, I knew it was going to be pretty epic, but hoo-boy, that was a damned good epic book; and it never felt as if there were *too* many characters in there, and since every character knows at least two other characters, you won't easilly forget any of the characters, except maybe some of the aliens.

I read that about a hundred years ago, and from what I recall it left me pretty cold. I didn't find the hippo-aliens particularly threatening and the ending didn't really ring true to me. Niven and Pournelle are also pretty right wing, which may have put me off as well, though I can't remember in this instance.

[Lukipela]

The only really controversial thing I can remember about that book was the stuff about suffrage and mandatory civil service (if I'm remembering that right). I suppose that might not sit well with some of the more liberal folks out there. Oh! And there was that stuff about corporal punishment for crimes.

It's been ages since I read it, but I think civil/military service wasn't mandatory, but required to become a Citizen. and only Citizens could vote, and possibly have babies? And they had hilarious corporeal punishment where you brought your kid to the public stocks to get whipped and humiliated.

[Bleeding Star]

if you want I suppose I could start a new thread and do some more in depth quoting and we could chat about different ways of getting well and unwell.

You should do that.

Before that, I finished Heinlein's Starship Troopers. Wow. That movie was indeed nothing like it, at all. A very interesting book, though I somehow missed all that controversialness about it.

To my shame, I've never read Starship Troopers. I should do something about that. I have read some other Heinlein, though, and found it very much not to my taste.

[Eth]

  Well, what Heinlein books did you read?  There's Early Heinlein, and then there's Later Heinlein.  And there's a pretty big difference between the two.  Starship Troopers is Early Heinlein for sure. 

[Dragon]

I've just finished wading through 'Earth' a novel by David Brin.  And it was a slog, it's a novel set 50 years in the future from 1989/1990 and it's dated.  That said; my main grip is that the characters, bar the crazy lady*, are utterly forgettable; and a lot of the novel reads like an academic text book.  More than halfway through Brin is still introducing characters who have no impact on the main story line, characters who I just can't bring myself to care about.  On the subject of the main story, it would have made a much more entertaining short than an almost thousand page novel.  Meh.

*seriously: one insane old biddy on her PC almost succeeds in destroying the planet.

[Bleeding Star]

  Well, what Heinlein books did you read?  There's Early Heinlein, and then there's Later Heinlein.  And there's a pretty big difference between the two.  Starship Troopers is Early Heinlein for sure. 

Okay, looking through his catalogue I'm pretty sure it was "the number of the beast". I could have sworn I'd read more than that but that's the only title I recognise. I don't think I got more than halfway through the book - just too disjointed and didn't grab me at all. I'm guessing it counts as Later Heinlein? Is the early stuff better?

[Eth]

  I would say that Number of the Beast was Heinlein's absolute worst novel.  He definitely deserves a second chance, IMO.  I think that The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is a great example of his earlier style, and Stranger in a Strange Land is a good example of his later style (though actually Stranger was written before Moon).  Lookin on Wikipedia, it appears that both of these novels are from his "middle period."  I guess everyone has their own opinion of how to divide his work up.  I prefer to divide it into the early Hard SF stuff and the later Fantastic SF stuff.

[fossaman]

I kind of have to de-recommend 'Stranger in a Strange Land'. I stopped reading halfway through, when it stopped being about a mysterious Martian and started being about the mysterious Martian's sex cult. It really felt like Heinlein started smoking something about a third of the way through, and I can't say as I cared for the change.

[Eth]

  Well, there was a mysterious martian's sex cult in the book, I admit.  Heinlein was definately a perv; make no mistake.  I don't really see why that disqualifies the book though.

[Lukipela]

I'm reading "Stephen Fry in America", which is pretty good. He's driving through every state and trying to get a feel for it. Apparently there was a television series as well, which I should probably try to see. Each state is condensed on five pages or so, so it's lie a miniguide for us Euros. Quite handy, very interesting.

[Eth]

  That sounds awesome.  I love Stephen Fry.