Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.59 AVERAGE
3.59 AVERAGE
dark
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
This book was so up and down for people, pieces of it worked and others didn't. The book is a product of its time, which I tried to see past, but it's hard when I don't think there's enough substance beneath to support the story (especially in the third and fourth parts).
What started off as an interesting conceit toppled over into a sloppy, sexist, sixties pulp sex romp faster than you can say “grok.” Hard pass.
adventurous
funny
hopeful
mysterious
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Do not read the expanded edition! It is much wordier than the original 1961 edition. It does reveal some of Heinlein's more conservative points of view, but the book is better served in it's shorter form.
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
good story, but the misogyny is odious and doesn't age well. I really enjoyed this book 20 years ago. Interesting ideas. Some "cheap" borrowing of basic philosophy (Nietzsche).
challenging
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
THIS BOOK WAS BIZARRE BUT I COULDNT LOOK AWAY
Content Warnings
Moderate: Biphobia, Homophobia, Racial slurs, Rape, Sexism, Sexual content, Transphobia, Violence, Vomit, Cannibalism, Religious bigotry, Suicide attempt, Acephobia/Arophobia, Lesbophobia
A really compelling book and I am very glad I read it. It does leave me a bit confused in some aspects. I grok Martian pretty well, but it's very difficult to understand the 196os.
Be aware that though it seems it was quite a progressive point of view, there are both sexist and homophobic aspects that possibly wouldn't have been noticeable at the time and now are quite glaring. The whole religious communal sexual sharing thing is described with a weird fascination which comes across as slightly creepy, but I suspect that's because in 1961 it would have been as foreign as Martian -- is it because life imitates art that it now seems like a stereotyped description of 1967?
This is by no means the only book from the 60s to leave me perplexed. When I read books from earlier eras and also from later eras, I feel like I understand the points of view much better. The 1960s was a time of radical change and ideas, but maybe they just didn't take, because now they seem disconcerting.
Be aware that though it seems it was quite a progressive point of view, there are both sexist and homophobic aspects that possibly wouldn't have been noticeable at the time and now are quite glaring. The whole religious communal sexual sharing thing is described with a weird fascination which comes across as slightly creepy, but I suspect that's because in 1961 it would have been as foreign as Martian -- is it because life imitates art that it now seems like a stereotyped description of 1967?
This is by no means the only book from the 60s to leave me perplexed. When I read books from earlier eras and also from later eras, I feel like I understand the points of view much better. The 1960s was a time of radical change and ideas, but maybe they just didn't take, because now they seem disconcerting.
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes