Scan barcode
A review by feral_knight
Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein
adventurous
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
This was my first in a long list of military sci-fi novels that I plan to make the focus of this story graph account; at least right now. It seemed to me that this was The Hobbit of the genre, so it is where I began. Like The Hobbit it was written for a younger audience than the ones who usually enjoy it. Also like The Hobbit, it can be credited with starting the genre in a sense, despite there being examples that predate it. Hanging over this novel though is a shadow of its so-called controversy. Most people who spoke on it before seemed to fall into one of two camps. Either they considered it a literary masterpiece, or they hated it with burning passion. Let me speak for them and say - neither of these opinions are based on the quality of the writing or the story itself. They are not opinions of literature but political opinions. The book is neither of these things really.
It is written well. It is fast paced to read. It creates an interesting perspective on the world because all of it is being seen through the eyes of a character who may not be asking all the questions you are. You never really learn some information you might think would be key but the reason for this is because it is a story about a teenager in the future who joins the military just before a war breaks out, and his experiences throughout his military career with that war as a backdrop. Some things aren’t important to him, and some he doesn’t fully understand himself. As someone who did the same thing, I can tell you that these parts were often very accurate. The controversy stems from the fact that Heinlein at times seems to use the story as a vehicle for discussing his own political views at the time. Many of which may be unsettling to some. As for me, I sort of took all of this as being a part of the world building. Maybe they do represent how Heinlein really felt but I think good literature challenges you and makes you confront your own beliefs - it isn't demanding you believe them, and I don't have to believe everything a work of fiction tells me to enjoy a book. As it is, I did enjoy the book quite a bit, despite not agreeing with much of what was presented in terms of morality and other issues. I don't think it’s perfect, but I didn't think the Hobbit was either. I understand why it was controversial, but I mostly find the focus on that in the conversation frustrating.
That said, understand going in that it isn't a small section. Entire chapters will be devoted to discussions on the role of violence, justice, militarism, and human nature. You may or may not agree with these ideas. But I personally liked the idea of writing a sci-fi world with a controversial society that isn't about us as readers or writer dropping judgement. Instead, it is a reporting on how that society works. It was, for me, refreshing. So overall I would recommend it, but I'd also suggest that if you are the kind of person to knee jerk react to political and social ideas, then your opinion of this book is already settled long before you pick it up.
It is written well. It is fast paced to read. It creates an interesting perspective on the world because all of it is being seen through the eyes of a character who may not be asking all the questions you are. You never really learn some information you might think would be key but the reason for this is because it is a story about a teenager in the future who joins the military just before a war breaks out, and his experiences throughout his military career with that war as a backdrop. Some things aren’t important to him, and some he doesn’t fully understand himself. As someone who did the same thing, I can tell you that these parts were often very accurate. The controversy stems from the fact that Heinlein at times seems to use the story as a vehicle for discussing his own political views at the time. Many of which may be unsettling to some. As for me, I sort of took all of this as being a part of the world building. Maybe they do represent how Heinlein really felt but I think good literature challenges you and makes you confront your own beliefs - it isn't demanding you believe them, and I don't have to believe everything a work of fiction tells me to enjoy a book. As it is, I did enjoy the book quite a bit, despite not agreeing with much of what was presented in terms of morality and other issues. I don't think it’s perfect, but I didn't think the Hobbit was either. I understand why it was controversial, but I mostly find the focus on that in the conversation frustrating.
That said, understand going in that it isn't a small section. Entire chapters will be devoted to discussions on the role of violence, justice, militarism, and human nature. You may or may not agree with these ideas. But I personally liked the idea of writing a sci-fi world with a controversial society that isn't about us as readers or writer dropping judgement. Instead, it is a reporting on how that society works. It was, for me, refreshing. So overall I would recommend it, but I'd also suggest that if you are the kind of person to knee jerk react to political and social ideas, then your opinion of this book is already settled long before you pick it up.