Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 86 posts

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#41

Post by Jtsummers »

mikeash wrote: post #25
sampo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> paen to the military I always thought Starship Troopers was meant to be a satire, not praise for war. Just like Springsteen's Born in the U.S.A. isn't a patriotic song.

Given Heinlein's history and politics, I don't think so. Now the movie , that was definitely meant to be satire. Which is why so many fans of the book hate it.

> Now the movie, that was definitely meant to be satire. Which is why so many fans of the book hate it.

Ironically, many people hated the movie because they didn't recognize that it was satirizing the (apparently) pro-military book.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#42

Post by UnBe »

For anyone in the Vancouver area, Joe is a Guest of Honor at VCON (http://vcon.ca), in the first weekend of October. It's a smallish convention, so GoH are usually easy to find and chat with.

Full disclosure, I am helping put on the convention, but it's a non-profit convention put on by volunteers.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#43

Post by efuquen »

dragonwriter wrote: post #30
notahacker wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying they're "nearly identical" seems to miss the point that the former is a paen to the military filled with lieutenant colonels waxing philosophical about how duty to fight is the basis of all morality, whilst the latter involves a brazenly cynical protagonist whose thoughts of war mostly involve hoping to find a way out of it...

> Saying they're "nearly identical" seems to miss the point that the former is a paen to the military Its been quite a long time since I read Starship Troopers , but IIRC it doesn't read like much of a paean to the military on any but an extremely shallow reading.

Then I guess I, and Heinlein, read it pretty shallowly, since he's has been quoted as saying his novel glorifies the military. I still really enjoyed the book, but I don't know how you could possibly read it as not a pro military sort of novel. Obviously the point isn't to glorify violence for violence's sake, he attempts to morally justify the use of force in the same as has been customary for generations.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#44

Post by efuquen »

shepardrtc wrote: post #27
sampo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> paen to the military I always thought Starship Troopers was meant to be a satire, not praise for war. Just like Springsteen's Born in the U.S.A. isn't a patriotic song.

You are correct, it is satirical. But its a common misconception that its some sort of military love-letter. Edit: So I assume that downvotes now are a form of disagreement rather than a measure of contribution to the discussion.

And where exactly are you getting the idea from that it was 'satire'? Everything I've seen Heinlein ever say about the novel straightly points to it not being satire; he was completely serious his thoughts on philosophy, morality, government, society, etc. It may be hard to believe, but I think he meant what he wrote.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#45

Post by megaman22 »

angersock wrote: post #17
griffinmahon wrote: post #7

I read Starship Troopers and The Forever War back-to-back in like three days, and I wasn't so much of a fan of Haldeman's book, the writing just didn't seem as good to me as Heinlein's and in any case they're nearly identical -- though obviously the relativity thing and time making the "forever" part true was a very good point.

You should probably go back and read the books again, maybe with some more time between readings, and paying more attention to the people and less to the tech. The jaded, alienated Mandella in The Forever War has a lot more to say about the evolution of his society than Rico does. Armor is yet-another excellent contemporary to both of those books.

Armor is fantastic. It's up there with Ender's Game on my list of military sci-fi.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#46

Post by megaman22 »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #13
jcranmer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, mankind has probably not been at war for most of its existence. Homo sapiens comes into existence ~200kya. By contrast, there is no evidence of warfare for most of the Paleolithic, and the first unambiguous evidence only comes ~10-12kya. In other words, the development of warfare is only roughly contemporaneous with the development of agriculture and sedentarism.

The avoidance of war was probably due to the low population numbers and the ability of groups of hunter/gatherers to avoid each other. As the population grew and humans came into more frequent contact with each other, warfare was a natural by-product of the increased contact between groups.

Source for that? I remember reading that something like 25% of paleolithic skeletons bore signs of violence consistent with getting poked with spears or bashed with clubs.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#47

Post by Osmium »

PuffinBlue wrote: post #33
gregjwild wrote: post #4

'“To say that The Forever War is the best science fiction war novel ever written is to damn it with faint praise.” It’s one of the best books about war, period' I'd probably raise that on Gibson. It's one of the best books, period. "The protagonist, an almost-anagrammed stand-in for Haldeman named Mandella, is hurled across far reaches of the galaxy to fight a poorly understood, apparently undefeatable foe." In that…

I often read comments like this about The Forever War and I'm never sure if I read the same book. I enjoyed it but it seemed an awful lot more shallow than it's given credit for. It just seemed to me that it raised lots of ideas but never really explored them fully. I found it a bit 'thin'. Perhaps that was intentional as a corollary to the breakneck pace of time-dilation Mandella faced and the societal change he fac…

> I often read comments like this about The Forever War and I'm never sure if I read the same book. I enjoyed it but it seemed an awful lot more shallow than it's given credit for.

Likewise. Which is not to say I thought it was bad. I think perhaps it was a product of its time? I could imagine it felt a lot more urgent and prescient when it was released than it does today (I read it for the first time earlier this year).

Personally, I found Use of Weapons by Iain M. Banks to be much more compelling when it comes to a sci-fi study on the nature of war. Each to their own, of course.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#48

Post by shepardrtc »

efuquen wrote: post #44
shepardrtc wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct, it is satirical. But its a common misconception that its some sort of military love-letter. Edit: So I assume that downvotes now are a form of disagreement rather than a measure of contribution to the discussion.

And where exactly are you getting the idea from that it was 'satire'? Everything I've seen Heinlein ever say about the novel straightly points to it not being satire; he was completely serious his thoughts on philosophy, morality, government, society, etc. It may be hard to believe, but I think he meant what he wrote.

How often did Stephen Colbert say his show was satire? He rarely broke character. And I don't recall him ever saying it was satire. But yet it was quite clear that it was. Of course, his method was rather over-the-top. Heinlein's was not.

Here's some reading: http://www.locusmag.com/Perspectives/2012/11/the-joke-is-on-...

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#49

Post by iamcurious »

mikeash wrote: post #25
sampo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> paen to the military I always thought Starship Troopers was meant to be a satire, not praise for war. Just like Springsteen's Born in the U.S.A. isn't a patriotic song.

Given Heinlein's history and politics, I don't think so. Now the movie , that was definitely meant to be satire. Which is why so many fans of the book hate it.

How so? It is the same guy that wrote "Stranger in a Strange Land" after all.

Re: The Author of Our Best SF Military Novel Explains the Future of War

#50

Post by justin66 »

KingMob wrote: post #21

For all those who haven't read it, check out the "sequel", The Forever Peace. I place "sequel" in quotes, because it's only thematically related, there's no continuation of characters or plots. In fact, it's set much closer to the present, and the use of remote-controlled robots makes it feel super-current. Unlike The Forever War, it envisions one way war could end. The final line of the Vice story is "When war is un…

> As much as I love TFW, I personally think The Forever Peace is a stronger novel.

Honestly, a number of his novels are better, as he freely acknowledges (though not in this interview). It'd be pretty odd for a writer with a long career to perform his best work right out of the gate. (he's written several books in the last decade which are put together a lot more masterfully than The Forever War... I felt Camouflage was pretty close to being a perfect SF novel when I read it the first time)

It's certainly his most influential book, which is about being in the right place at the right time.

Post reply on HN