You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.59 AVERAGE
3.59 AVERAGE
Despite having been aware of this polarizing novel for a couple of decades now, I didn’t really know anything about the story until right before starting it, when I looked up a bit of the history of it. In some futuristic version of Earth, it is discovered that a survivor of the first expedition to Mars has been raised as a Martian. Now returned to Earth as a young man, Valentine Michael Smith (“Mike”) is viewed somewhat as a freak, somewhat as an ambassador, and in great deal as a commodity. Without drilling too deeply into the plotline (which can be found in numerous other locations for those that wish to know it), Mike evolves mentally from infant awareness to guru-esque philosophy in relatively short order and suffers the consequences of thinking differently than the mass public.
I went into reading this book with great trepidation. Having read some reviews already before even starting, I was curious to see into which camp I’d fall: those that are fans or those that loathed it. Now finished, I find myself unpleasantly right down the middle. Normally I don’t mind middle of the road impressions of books; it means the story was fairly decent and well-paced…nothing wowed me and nothing bored me. It was “a’ight”. The middle of the road for this one, though, isn’t settling well.
There are some that strongly oppose Heinlein’s characterization of women in this novel, that he has trivialized their worth by making them subservient even when in apparent positions of strength, and that they are demeaned by the men who pat them on the heads like obedient puppies. While I did see the points where these aspects were evident, there were also moments where it seemed the women went along with it just to indulge the idiot men and that, given the need, they’d easily bowl the men over and take on the power. I found myself more irritated that Heinlein didn’t seem to have the imagination to think of women of the future in any other way but it was more of an eye-rolling event than a reason to dismiss the whole book.
Other reviews/summaries reflect on the extensive soapbox that Mike’s mentor, Jubal Harshaw, likes to pull out to comment on religion and political happenings in the storyline. Unlike the objections to the treatment of women, this was a viewpoint I could support. Viewed as a thinly veiled mouthpiece for Heinlein himself, Jubal often starts off on an interesting point, but his tendency to meander on and on while the recipient of his vocal vomit responds with an occasional “Uh” grew tedious and tired and made the novel way longer than it needed to be.
I was also disenchanted with the Earthization of Mike as the time progressed. While it was inevitable given the rate of his information absorption, I found the story after the point where Mike and Jill leave the shelter of Jubal’s home to be boring and hard to chug through. I was much more interested in the learning and discovery process; the moment Mike discovers sex, it seems like it became all about that, and this got old quickly.
Add to this the overuse of the then-new term “grok” (meant to convey, among other things, a sense of complete understanding), and this book that was probably shocking at the time of publication seemed a bit dated and forced now.
I definitely didn’t hate the book, as some seem to. I can see how it has obtained (and retained) a place of honor in literary milemarkers. But I also didn’t particularly like the book, and that has left me really disappointed. Rather than being “a’ight” it was just kind of “eh”, and that’s a bummer.
I went into reading this book with great trepidation. Having read some reviews already before even starting, I was curious to see into which camp I’d fall: those that are fans or those that loathed it. Now finished, I find myself unpleasantly right down the middle. Normally I don’t mind middle of the road impressions of books; it means the story was fairly decent and well-paced…nothing wowed me and nothing bored me. It was “a’ight”. The middle of the road for this one, though, isn’t settling well.
There are some that strongly oppose Heinlein’s characterization of women in this novel, that he has trivialized their worth by making them subservient even when in apparent positions of strength, and that they are demeaned by the men who pat them on the heads like obedient puppies. While I did see the points where these aspects were evident, there were also moments where it seemed the women went along with it just to indulge the idiot men and that, given the need, they’d easily bowl the men over and take on the power. I found myself more irritated that Heinlein didn’t seem to have the imagination to think of women of the future in any other way but it was more of an eye-rolling event than a reason to dismiss the whole book.
Other reviews/summaries reflect on the extensive soapbox that Mike’s mentor, Jubal Harshaw, likes to pull out to comment on religion and political happenings in the storyline. Unlike the objections to the treatment of women, this was a viewpoint I could support. Viewed as a thinly veiled mouthpiece for Heinlein himself, Jubal often starts off on an interesting point, but his tendency to meander on and on while the recipient of his vocal vomit responds with an occasional “Uh” grew tedious and tired and made the novel way longer than it needed to be.
I was also disenchanted with the Earthization of Mike as the time progressed. While it was inevitable given the rate of his information absorption, I found the story after the point where Mike and Jill leave the shelter of Jubal’s home to be boring and hard to chug through. I was much more interested in the learning and discovery process; the moment Mike discovers sex, it seems like it became all about that, and this got old quickly.
Add to this the overuse of the then-new term “grok” (meant to convey, among other things, a sense of complete understanding), and this book that was probably shocking at the time of publication seemed a bit dated and forced now.
I definitely didn’t hate the book, as some seem to. I can see how it has obtained (and retained) a place of honor in literary milemarkers. But I also didn’t particularly like the book, and that has left me really disappointed. Rather than being “a’ight” it was just kind of “eh”, and that’s a bummer.
Read a hundred pages. It took me a while to realize the book was a satire, and it took me longer to realize it was supposed to be funny. And I think I was supposed to be shocked some, too. Tedious.
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
A MUCH easier read after Starship Troopers, but Heinlein's style of regular pontification in addition to his writing from a 1950s/60s male perspective is... not the easiest or most fascinating to read.
I enjoyed his exploration of sexuality and morality, etc, but felt it was very one-dimensionally explored through conversation instead of actual plot.
The end reveal of Mike's purpose & what that meant for the world was MUCH more interesting and I wish had been the premise of the entire book!
3 ⭐ = I probably won't read it again, but might recommend it. Specifically to Sci-Fi fans who enjoy seeing the development of the genre, but who can stomach near constant sexist/racist microagressions and a LOT of monologuing.
I enjoyed his exploration of sexuality and morality, etc, but felt it was very one-dimensionally explored through conversation instead of actual plot.
The end reveal of Mike's purpose & what that meant for the world was MUCH more interesting and I wish had been the premise of the entire book!
3 ⭐ = I probably won't read it again, but might recommend it. Specifically to Sci-Fi fans who enjoy seeing the development of the genre, but who can stomach near constant sexist/racist microagressions and a LOT of monologuing.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Homophobia, Sexism
First section is wonderful. The rest is rather silly.
I loved where this was going for 200 or so pages... I felt immersed in classic sci-fi. Then it took a turn for the worse, story-wise. I was not interested in Mike forming a religion when the conflicts set up in the first half of the story could have led to much more interesting stories. Add that with the way women were portrayed which, at first, gave a sort of Noir feel to the book, but by the end it was just annoying.
But then again maybe I just don't grok.
But then again maybe I just don't grok.
adventurous
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
On its face, it’s a classic old school Sci-fi, but it largely serves as a vehicle for the author’s diatribes about society. While Heinlein created some insightful commentary on society, religion, and morals, it is all delivered in a tone that I felt was too pretentious. Furthermore, the weight of Heinlein’s philosophical discourse places pressure on the plot, and some narrative developments feel forced in order to accommodate philosophical messaging. For example, the part when Smith suddenly realizes the depths of humanity about 2/3 of the way through the book feels especially forced. Within pages, smith goes from an innocent outsider to a polyamorous cult leader The most damning part of the whole book is the fact that Heinlein presents his ideas as enlightened but he doesn’t even realize that they are still steeped in misogyny, the patriarchy, and racism. While sex is destigmatized, women are still presented as sexual objects, and the n-word is casually used once towards the end for no real reason
adventurous
challenging
funny
hopeful
inspiring
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I’m really surprised I liked this book. My main takeaway is that I would love to have a grass rug in my home. I went in knowing that it would be sexist, so maybe I’m not as affected from it. Most of it comes from Jubal on to the main female characters: Jill, the 3 secretaries, Patty, Dawn, and Becky. The most shocking examples to me involve him casually referring to all of these highly educated grown women as “girls” who need “spanking.” Also, the word “fanny” does not belong in any book, in any context, ever. And in Strange in a Strange Land, the women seem to find Jubal and his subjugation of themselves amusing and entertaining, possibly due to his age.
Mike however, is extremely pure in his views and seems unaffected by these notions. As the book progresses, all of the main characters except for Jubal try to become more “Martian.” It seems like some characters’ sexist internalizations become focused on women’s autonomy. For example, the one quote I always hear is when Jill says “9 times out of 10, women at least partly deserve to get raped.” I am not denying this is horrible, from both the character’s point of view and Heinlein’s audacity in making the intention behind this so unclear. But I think the intention is to show how Jill progresses in her views to be less human and more Martian.
Heinlein first describes her as men being her “hobby.” But then later as Jubal talks to Sam, he states “the point is that we are now partners, more so than we ever were outside… Shucks, this pairing needn’t be between man and women. Dawn and Jill for example—they work together as an acrobatic team.” The fact that she is given ability to have a female partner shows the he’s giving her autonomy.
I also think that according to this text, Heinlein views rape as a human immorality and a product of an unequal power distribution that needs to be overcome. When Jubal talks to Sam, he ponders “What happens to the [medical] industry—and to the threat of moralists—when a female conceives only as a act of volition…but any male who tried to rape her would die so quickly…When women are are free of guilt and fear—but invulnerable?” By introducing these concepts he’s countering any man’s ability to control a woman.
However, a genuinely frustrating thing throughout this book is that Jill, like everyone else in the book, regardless of gender (and news headlines themselves) seems to be a plot device. Heinlein first describes her judgmental views about sex (when she criticizes Duke’s porn and Dawn’s promiscuousness in the Fosterite church) and Ben’s (when he gets freaked out after being asked to be in an orgy) so that Jubal can come out morally superior and ridicule their notions as being limited by an earthly scope.
Throughout the story, Jubal’s polymath abilities give him this godlike quality, and so Mike worships him as an “Old One.” He is repeatedly referred to as the only one who can properly “grok” something without understanding Martian. The fact that he unwillingly becomes a saint in Mike’s cult/church/school is hilarious at best, but truly highlights Heinlein’s portrayal of him being unflawed in his logic. Which is wild, because the secretaries constantly disregard him as a silly old man who knows nothing about women. But maybe someone always worships their parent when they are young.
I thought it was interesting that all the characters were given different archetypes based on varying religious texts. Jubal as God, Mike as Jesus (or perhaps Michael the archangel) Jill as Mary, Becky as a prophet, Patty as a shaman, Dawn as Mary Magdalan, and the 3 secretaries as Houris. Even Jubal’s home is compared to the garden of Eden, a paradise sheltered from the world where Mike can learn to be human. It is concerning that Jill is originally shown as a motherly figure to Mike, but later has sex with him. However, this Oedipus complex is very common in Greek Myths, to which Heinlein also compares their lifestyle after they form the church.
Overall, I thought it was a great sociological dissection of what makes us human and what needs to be challenged to live happier and more fulfilled lives, from monogamy, to associating money with worth, to the concept of land. I’m very glad Heinlein combatted the missionary ideology he has Mike building up from the very beginning. When talking to Jubal at the very end of the book, he says “An attempt to make us behave like Martians would kill us certainly, but not painlessly. It would be a great wrongness.” This leaves the reader to determine what parts of Martian life are appropriate for human development and which simply cannot translate.
I’m still struggling with the idea of cannibalism after someone willing dies. It’s another one of those philosophical ideas that Jubal mentions as being common in other human historical societies. But it seems unsanitary and emotionally distressing for humans, even if a soul passes on and is disconnected from the body after death. Another thing that bothered me is how Jill asks Mike to look less androgynous to avoid male attention, even though later in the book they view all sex as a “growing closer.” I love how water is the connection between their lives, and is the ultimate marriage. Their concept of sharing collective wealth, property, and love is a good way to communicate socialist idealism, and I can see how this book would drastically shape 60s’ ideals in America.
I was kinda enjoying it in that "this is an old piece so you can't judge it to modern standards" sort of way. Then this:
"9 times out of 10 if a girl gets raped it's partly her fault"
The first third of the book was fine, second two thirds were one large orgy with long preachy dialogues sprinkled throughout.
2 stars just cause it started out fine. Then it went to shit.
"9 times out of 10 if a girl gets raped it's partly her fault"
The first third of the book was fine, second two thirds were one large orgy with long preachy dialogues sprinkled throughout.
2 stars just cause it started out fine. Then it went to shit.
It seems to be a love it/hate it book. Sadly, I'm not sure which side pick.
While it wasn't completely offensive by the standards of its time, by today's, most definitely. But there was enough in there to make you think and scratch your head.
Either way, I can now say I have read it.
While it wasn't completely offensive by the standards of its time, by today's, most definitely. But there was enough in there to make you think and scratch your head.
Either way, I can now say I have read it.