From: "Strong, Lee" <StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL>
To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] So Many Universes, So Little Time
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 08:28:29 -0400
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

	Well, first, the conflict of interest warning:  I'm working on a
vast spacetime scheme of my own that goes Heinlein one or two better so I
might not be the best critic.  On the other hand, I regard him as one of my
three most favorite authors, so maybe it balances.
	I liked much of _The Number of the Beast_ (TNOTB) but disliked many
of the details.  The basic concept of universe hopping is a big favorite of
mine and entering fictional worlds is another favorite.  If you assume a
sufficiently large universe of universes, you can theoretically find a
universe that matches any arbitrary criteria allowed by the physical laws of
the universe of universes.  Since scientists recently described an odd
genetic disorder that causes humans to approximate Norse elves, a fairyland
somewhat like Oz is theoretically feasible.  More than one source identifies
Oz with Australia including an old issue of _The WSFA Journal_.  One
complaint that I have at this point is that the characters did not explore
any of the alternate universes in any detail except for the rather boring
Anglo-Russian Mars-ten.  I would have prefered a plot in which the lead
characters had a more significant impact on the various universe, perhaps by
introducing helpful tools and ideas.  Surely the Lensmen would have
benefited from integrated circuit technology!
	Sidebar:  I recommend avoiding Philip Jose Farmer's _A Barnstormer
in Oz_ which rationalizes the alternate universe of Oz in SF terms, but
utterly loses the flavor that makes Oz Oz.  Never heard of Edgar Eager's
_Seven Day Magic_.
	I had three major problems with TNOTB, which I also had with much of
Heinlein's later work.  First, I lost willing suspension of disbelief when
he described his time-space twister technology.  Applying pressure on
gyroscopes from four axes would simply result in a crushed mass of metal,
not higher dimensional transitions.  And I *really* choked on the idea that
universe jumping is energy cost free.  Further, the fact that the characters
jump to their literary favorite universes rather than random universes
strikes me as too cutesy by half.  I would prefer to see them explore a
number of universes before realizing that they can focus on favorites.
Second, the character development was not my cup of tea in several areas.
While I have experienced similar arguing over command relationships while
playing Dungeons & Dragons, it struck me as stupid that the Carter-Burroughs
family of geniuses would continue arguing for over 100 pages <I counted>
while in life & death situations.  The sexuality of the Long Family is not
my cup of tea and I'll leave it at that.  Third, there's no resolution to
the main plot.  The "Black Hats" are introduced as the critical threat but
never effectively dealt with nor did they play any special role in the main
plot of the book as it developed.  Not good writing IMHO.  On the other
hand, it does seem to be self consistent in terms of the book in which the
universe of universes is a Myth of Myths.
	If you want a review of Heinlein's TNOTB, I give it three stars our
of five for great concept but poor execution.  -LS

-----Original Message-----
From: Samuel Lubell [mailto:lubell at cais.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 11:42 PM
To: WSFA members
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Are You An Islar or Islata?

I'm probably forfeiting any claims to being a good judge of literary merit
but I *liked* _Number of the Beast_.  The idea of being able to enter your
favorite books fascinated me as a kid reading Edgar Eager's _Seven Day
Magic_ and seeing Heinlein's take on Oz was fascinating.

I never understood why the book was so hated.  Now _I Shall Fear No Evil_
is a different story altogether.