Scan barcode
filippasundgren's review against another edition
adventurous
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
Det är så fascinerande att denna bok skrevs på 60-talet och ändå lyckas vara relevant i dagens disskutioner om artificiell intelligens och hur den kan nyttjas för gott och ont. Även om begreppet ”AI” aldrig används så ställs frågan om Mike besitter ett medvetande - och många av hans handlingar talar för att han kan bilda relationer och personliga åsikter om världen kring honom. I berättelsen deriverar inte datorn från sin lojalitet, men frågan om huruvida den lika väl hade kunnat användas för ont med lite mänsklig övertalning finns alltid nära.
Liksom artificiell intelligens diskuteras även mänsklighet och dess ramar. Jordens befolkning uppvisar svårigheter att respektera månens självständighet eftersom de ”bara är bönder och fångar”. Det står förmodligen nära med synen under 60-talet då ekonomin växte otroligt och rikedomar prioriterades över ett ärligt och lyckligt liv. Än idag så ses inte fängslade personer som delar av samhället på sina ställen i världen - även om det är självklarhet för oss i Sverige att fångar är människor i behov av rehabilitering.
Handlingen spelar mycket på frihet och revolution. Inte konstigt kanske, jag vill minnas att de som växte upp på tiden som boken skrevs kallas för ”children of the revolution”. Många orättvisor konfronterade världsbefolkningen på den tiden och det är inte konstigt att det reflekteras i litteraturen. Teorin om att den enda vägen till frihet sker genom revolution och reform speglas starkt (shoutout Marx). Jag trodde vid många tillfällen att vi som läsare skulle vittna hur makt korrupterar individer, men jag är fortfarande osäker på om det verkligen hände så jag avstår från att utveckla den punkten.
Om man bortser från handlingen och karaktärerna finns det fortfarande mycket intressant innehåll i den här boken. Språket som används är väldigt spartanskt och snålt. Pronomen och andra termer för vem det är som uttalar sig saknas ofta. Jag misstänker att det var författarens egna teori om hur språket skulle se ut år 2077 - återstå att se antar jag. Redan idag ser vi förändringar i språket för dessa klasser, så det är antagligen inte så långt från sanningen.
Kvinnosynen som presenteras på Luna är väldigt rolig. Inte hemskt realistisk (skulle jag misstänka) men kul att reflektera över.
Skulle jag rekommendera den här boken? Om man är intresserad av politisk teori och sci-fi: absolut! Det är ett intressant verk av sin tid. Den kommer däremot inte att erhålla en plats bland mina personliga favoriter. Känslorna som jag upplevde under bokens gång var inte tillräckligt radikala för att den ska uppnå favvostatus (även om jag blev upprörd i slutet).
shockingshields's review against another edition
challenging
inspiring
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
The book's pace jumps around wildly and never really settles. It sometimes feels like a train rolling down a hill that might find its brake and stop suddenly.
floatsomejetsome's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
biolexicon's review against another edition
2.0
Wyoming's hot... we get it.
Presented some interesting concepts though.
Presented some interesting concepts though.
cover's review against another edition
1.75
Read more like a log or meeting notes than a novel, but was an interesting take on AI. Surprisingly good predictions too (AI wise. The rest was insane and weird)
vortimer's review against another edition
2.0
I don't care for Heinlein's politics - this seems almost a Libertarian manifesto, his attitude to women is problematic, and his writing style rather old fashioned.
kdsterling's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
Content Warnings
Moderate: Sexism
somesnarksareboojums's review against another edition
adventurous
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
bool_'s review against another edition
adventurous
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
teokajlibroj's review against another edition
3.0
The book opens well and has some good ideas but unfortunately fails to live up to the potential. For a start Heinlein essentially cheats by giving the revolutionaries an all-knowing computer that solves all their problems and removes the need for tough decisions. Everything goes exactly to plan which removes all tension from the story.
I had high hopes for the world building but ended up disappointed. How people survive in a lawless society is an intriguing idea but Heinlein almost completely ignores it. It's only halfway through the book that we are even told there are no laws and the solution doesn't make any sense (why would people pay for a judgement?). Bar that one scene, there's next to no social commentary. Even once the rebellion happens, it's unclear what the rebels replace it with or how the new society functions.
The line marriages also could be an interesting concept but they're not fully explored. Despite saying otherwise, Mannie doesn't seem to care about his family and completely ignores his children. There is also a weird incestuous and underage sex vibe in the marriage, it's treated as normal for children to be married as soon as they reach puberty.
There's also the rampant sexism. Heinlein probably considered himself progressive and perhaps for the times he was, but the depiction of women has not aged well. The only characteristic the women in the book have is their beauty. Every time Wyoh enters a room, the man stop to stare at her, cat-call, wolf-whistle and this is all treated like a compliment. For some reason people think she's a strong female character, but the Prof makes it clear that the only thing she brings to the revolution is her beauty. In fact she does nothing else during the revolution or government, except look pretty and have the men explain things to her. At one point the narrator notes favourably that during a meeting she kept her pretty mouth shut (his words not mine).
The ending seemed like a cop-out and the author didn't know how to end the book.
I had high hopes for the world building but ended up disappointed. How people survive in a lawless society is an intriguing idea but Heinlein almost completely ignores it. It's only halfway through the book that we are even told there are no laws and the solution doesn't make any sense (why would people pay for a judgement?). Bar that one scene, there's next to no social commentary. Even once the rebellion happens, it's unclear what the rebels replace it with or how the new society functions.
The line marriages also could be an interesting concept but they're not fully explored. Despite saying otherwise, Mannie doesn't seem to care about his family and completely ignores his children. There is also a weird incestuous and underage sex vibe in the marriage, it's treated as normal for children to be married as soon as they reach puberty.
There's also the rampant sexism. Heinlein probably considered himself progressive and perhaps for the times he was, but the depiction of women has not aged well. The only characteristic the women in the book have is their beauty. Every time Wyoh enters a room, the man stop to stare at her, cat-call, wolf-whistle and this is all treated like a compliment. For some reason people think she's a strong female character, but the Prof makes it clear that the only thing she brings to the revolution is her beauty. In fact she does nothing else during the revolution or government, except look pretty and have the men explain things to her. At one point the narrator notes favourably that during a meeting she kept her pretty mouth shut (his words not mine).
The ending seemed like a cop-out and the author didn't know how to end the book.