From: "Strong, Lee" <StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL>
To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: So Many Universes, So Little Time
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 12:57:50 -0400
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

	Steve mentioned the need for a good editor.  Some reviewer, speaking
of similar problems with an Arthur C. Clarke collection, suggested the
Sydney Glurz Test.  Would I, the editor, accept this writing if it was sent
to me over the transom by someone named Sydney Glurz as opposed to A Big
Name Author?  The Test works well in real life, too.

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Smith [mailto:sgs at aginc.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 12:23 PM
To: WSFA members
Subject: [WSFA] Re: So Many Universes, So Little Time

"Strong, Lee" wrote:

>         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

I agree almost completely.

Two and a half stars.  He stole the opening from Doc Smith ("Subspace
Explorers") and the ending from a bid promo by Phil Foglio for Iguanacon
II ("Earth is being invaded by aliens.  Solution: Worldcon").  The
ending is the biggest wet firecracker I can remember.  (Presumably, by
the ending the reader will have forgotten that the Black Hats were
setting off nukes at the beginning.)

The "twister" gadget violates the first rule of SF -- "Never Explain".
If RAH knew how it worked, he'd have written a patent application
instead of a novel.  The "opposed gyroscopes" gimmick is ancient.

Bickering in life- or- death situations?  Yeah, that's how some people
react.  Yes, it can be really tedious, in both fiction and real life.

I went back and reread TNotB a while back; it's quite reasonably
readable if you just skip the Mars stuff.  Great?  No.

In all of RAH's later work (TNotB and after), I get a strong feeling
that he really, really needed a good editor.  Lotta good stuff, mixed in
with a lot of crap that a less exalted author wouldn't be allowed to get
away with.

--
Steve Smith                                           sgs at aginc.net
Agincourt Computing                            http://www.aginc.net
"Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense."