angelofthe0dd's review
2.0
Not nearly as good as I had hoped. The plot just kind of meanders around a semi-humorous, biblical theme. Meh.
mschlat's review
3.0
An odd duck.
I loved this book back when I bought it (the early 80's), but this reread has me pondering. At the time, I think I enjoyed the transgressive nature of the book (a Heinlein take on fundamentalist Christianity), but this reading left me wanting a deeper examination.
While the plot lifts loosely from the plot of the book of Job, the book as a whole does not refer to the dialogues of Job. And really, the bulk of Job is the discussion between Job, his friends, and (finally) God. The plot is a stepping off point for the discussion. But Heinlein's version is mostly plot. The questions of unfairness are - for the most part - simply answered by pointing out that God is a manipulator with little compassion for his creation.
Second, our main character is a fundamentalist Christian with some frightening views on race, gender, and society in general. But, he is also a Heinlein protagonist with the flexibility and openness of mind one would expect. It's a strange confluence. It's as if the character has the correct attitudes and beliefs for his role, but a very different temperament. The emphasis on moving through parallel worlds (this book's version of the torture of Job) highlights that perhaps the beliefs and attitude are simply environment, that if you were plunged into a libertine world, you would be a libertine. But even at the end of the book, that point isn't clear.
It's fun, and the parallel worlds are interesting, but it left me thinking that so much more could be said.
I loved this book back when I bought it (the early 80's), but this reread has me pondering. At the time, I think I enjoyed the transgressive nature of the book (a Heinlein take on fundamentalist Christianity), but this reading left me wanting a deeper examination.
While the plot lifts loosely from the plot of the book of Job, the book as a whole does not refer to the dialogues of Job. And really, the bulk of Job is the discussion between Job, his friends, and (finally) God. The plot is a stepping off point for the discussion. But Heinlein's version is mostly plot. The questions of unfairness are - for the most part - simply answered by pointing out that God is a manipulator with little compassion for his creation.
Second, our main character is a fundamentalist Christian with some frightening views on race, gender, and society in general. But, he is also a Heinlein protagonist with the flexibility and openness of mind one would expect. It's a strange confluence. It's as if the character has the correct attitudes and beliefs for his role, but a very different temperament. The emphasis on moving through parallel worlds (this book's version of the torture of Job) highlights that perhaps the beliefs and attitude are simply environment, that if you were plunged into a libertine world, you would be a libertine. But even at the end of the book, that point isn't clear.
It's fun, and the parallel worlds are interesting, but it left me thinking that so much more could be said.
mindduckbooks's review
Check out our discussion about this book on our podcast. Mind Duck Books Episode 23: https://bit.ly/3CuhYV4
javamamanc's review
adventurous
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
spinnerroweok's review
4.0
A fun fast read. Heinlein is a little all over the place with his theological commentary. Sometimes it's hard to tell what his point is. I read this book about 20 years ago and didn't remember a thing about it. It saved me some money there because I still had the book.
Update: Originally read in 17 November 1989.
Update: Originally read in 17 November 1989.
haleyshort's review
4.0
3.5 stars
This was such a wild ride. It was given to me by a friend’s boyfriend because I told him I liked sci-fi and had never read Heinlein. I had no idea what to expect and even if he had given me a brief synopsis I would have still been surprised.
I was raised by two Atheists, both raised religious in different Christian faiths. My brother and I were always encouraged to develop our own ideas about the universe but I was certainly influenced by my parent’s lack of belief (I refused to say the word “God” during the pledge of allegiance because it didn’t feel right). We went to church a few times as a cultural experience and to please my grandparents but I didn’t absorb very much. I’ve always felt like I don’t know quite as much about Christianity specifically as I should, living where I do and having the education that I have.
This book was one hell of a way to intrigue me into the bizarre world of believers. I plan to crack open the King James Bible for the first time. I have been meaning to read it - it’s an important text no matter what God you pray to - but I’ve never been enthusiastic about it. I don’t have positive associations with Bible readers.
Heinlein interrogates the complexity of belief along with the power of love. This novel, despite its many worlds, twists and turns literally throughout the universe, is ultimately about what we would do, could do for love. Love in many forms: faith, loyalty, perseverance, lust, patience.
I appreciated the humor, the self awareness, and the creativity of the story. I know that a lot of it went over my head but I’m hoping that King James will help me out with that. I don’t think that I’m headed for any major religious revelations, but I hope to understand a little bit more of what makes the world around me tick the way that it does.
This was such a wild ride. It was given to me by a friend’s boyfriend because I told him I liked sci-fi and had never read Heinlein. I had no idea what to expect and even if he had given me a brief synopsis I would have still been surprised.
I was raised by two Atheists, both raised religious in different Christian faiths. My brother and I were always encouraged to develop our own ideas about the universe but I was certainly influenced by my parent’s lack of belief (I refused to say the word “God” during the pledge of allegiance because it didn’t feel right). We went to church a few times as a cultural experience and to please my grandparents but I didn’t absorb very much. I’ve always felt like I don’t know quite as much about Christianity specifically as I should, living where I do and having the education that I have.
This book was one hell of a way to intrigue me into the bizarre world of believers. I plan to crack open the King James Bible for the first time. I have been meaning to read it - it’s an important text no matter what God you pray to - but I’ve never been enthusiastic about it. I don’t have positive associations with Bible readers.
Heinlein interrogates the complexity of belief along with the power of love. This novel, despite its many worlds, twists and turns literally throughout the universe, is ultimately about what we would do, could do for love. Love in many forms: faith, loyalty, perseverance, lust, patience.
I appreciated the humor, the self awareness, and the creativity of the story. I know that a lot of it went over my head but I’m hoping that King James will help me out with that. I don’t think that I’m headed for any major religious revelations, but I hope to understand a little bit more of what makes the world around me tick the way that it does.
sling's review
2.0
I need to cull books as my shelves are double-stacked. I first read this book a really long time ago - close to the publishing date. I can pretty much guarantee I won’t ever read it again.
I can’t think of much redeemable except that you are carried along by the mystery of the world shifts.
Into the donate bin it goes.
I can’t think of much redeemable except that you are carried along by the mystery of the world shifts.
Into the donate bin it goes.
old_man's review
4.0
Check out my video review here
Heinlein's story of a not-quite-married couple's journey back home from remote jungles of South America is a joy. And as I read it, I couldn't help but think of how many readers could benefit from witnessing the relationship between Alexander/Alec and Margrethe. Their journey pits them against numerous obstacles - including their disagreement on all things religion and folklore - and throughout them all, they remain completely committed to each other, literally braving Heaven and Hell to remain united.
While written from mainly Alexander/Alec's point of view, the book is heavy with dialogue which helps establish numerous characters throughout the book. The characters are all likable, humorous, and intriguing. The story is unique and offers unique perspectives on religion.
My one minor complaint with the book is it felt repetitive for large stretches in the middle third of the book. I must concede, this may have been by design. However, many segments in their adventure could have been completely eliminated without negatively impacting the book.
Heinlein's story of a not-quite-married couple's journey back home from remote jungles of South America is a joy. And as I read it, I couldn't help but think of how many readers could benefit from witnessing the relationship between Alexander/Alec and Margrethe. Their journey pits them against numerous obstacles - including their disagreement on all things religion and folklore - and throughout them all, they remain completely committed to each other, literally braving Heaven and Hell to remain united.
While written from mainly Alexander/Alec's point of view, the book is heavy with dialogue which helps establish numerous characters throughout the book. The characters are all likable, humorous, and intriguing. The story is unique and offers unique perspectives on religion.
My one minor complaint with the book is it felt repetitive for large stretches in the middle third of the book. I must concede, this may have been by design. However, many segments in their adventure could have been completely eliminated without negatively impacting the book.
ashleylm's review
2.0
I tried. But whenever I read Heinlein now, I feel like I'm watching an SCTV sketch, their take on some hard-boiled crime thriller, where Dave Thomas smacks Andrea Martin to the left, to the right, and then they kiss passionately, because he's a big strong man and she's unfortunate enough to be alive pre-1970s, and I just can't take it seriously anymore.
Page 1, 2nd paragraph: the hero is "delighted to accept the shielding offered by her well-fed carcass" (he's describing a lady who's sitting in the row in front of him). Page 5 brings us breastfeeding, and page 8 brings us "forty-odd (no, even) ... human feminine busts" ... all the women in the story exist because breasts are exciting, and not because, I dunno, maybe they have something to contribute to society and dreams of their own.
I wanted to read it because apparently it's his homage to James Branch Cabell (who I adore!), but Cabell is better, and earlier. It's easier to forgive certain sentiments in someone born 150 years ago then someone who was writing during my lifetime--just as what's cute in a three-year old is less cute in a 33 year old.
So, lesson learned (I should have learned it after Glory Road where I persisted for far too long), and on to more Lois McMaster Bujold, or Jonathan Stroud, or one of the many other authors whose works are fun, engaging, and yet don't make me feel like Uncle Jim's drunk one too many and launched into an inappropriate anecdote again.
(Note: 5 stars = amazing, wonderful, 4 = very good book, 3 = decent read, 2 = disappointing, 1 = awful, just awful. I'm fairly good at picking for myself so end up with a lot of 4s). I feel a lot of readers automatically render any book they enjoy 5, but I grade on a curve!
Page 1, 2nd paragraph: the hero is "delighted to accept the shielding offered by her well-fed carcass" (he's describing a lady who's sitting in the row in front of him). Page 5 brings us breastfeeding, and page 8 brings us "forty-odd (no, even) ... human feminine busts" ... all the women in the story exist because breasts are exciting, and not because, I dunno, maybe they have something to contribute to society and dreams of their own.
I wanted to read it because apparently it's his homage to James Branch Cabell (who I adore!), but Cabell is better, and earlier. It's easier to forgive certain sentiments in someone born 150 years ago then someone who was writing during my lifetime--just as what's cute in a three-year old is less cute in a 33 year old.
So, lesson learned (I should have learned it after Glory Road where I persisted for far too long), and on to more Lois McMaster Bujold, or Jonathan Stroud, or one of the many other authors whose works are fun, engaging, and yet don't make me feel like Uncle Jim's drunk one too many and launched into an inappropriate anecdote again.
(Note: 5 stars = amazing, wonderful, 4 = very good book, 3 = decent read, 2 = disappointing, 1 = awful, just awful. I'm fairly good at picking for myself so end up with a lot of 4s). I feel a lot of readers automatically render any book they enjoy 5, but I grade on a curve!
occasional_owl's review against another edition
adventurous
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5