Difference between revisions of "The Door Into Summer"

From TheAlmightyGuru
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 4: Line 4:
 
===Good===
 
===Good===
 
* I like the idea of going back in time to fix mistakes that you made, even though the book does a poor job of making it interesting.
 
* I like the idea of going back in time to fix mistakes that you made, even though the book does a poor job of making it interesting.
 +
* The fact that people with unpopular proclivities (nudists) can be successful members of society is a nice addition.
  
 
===Bad===
 
===Bad===
 
* Davis, an engineering genius, is ingeniously boring. His only fault seems to be that he's too trusting. Well, that, and he's a pedophile.
 
* Davis, an engineering genius, is ingeniously boring. His only fault seems to be that he's too trusting. Well, that, and he's a pedophile.
 
* The inventions Davis creates were not only impossible in the 1970s, but they were impossible in 2001, the book's "future."  
 
* The inventions Davis creates were not only impossible in the 1970s, but they were impossible in 2001, the book's "future."  
* Heinlein really missed the mark on future technology expecting the end of disease, colonized planets, and time travel by 2001. He also assumed that computers would still use tube-based memory, and that doctors would be offering their patients cigarettes in the hospital.
+
* Heinlein really missed the mark on future technology expecting high quality human stasis in the 1970s and the end of disease, colonized planets, and time travel by 2001. He also assumed that computers would still use tube-based memory in 2001, and that doctors would be offering their patients cigarettes in the hospital.
 
* For a book that ends saying free will is a real thing, unstoppable hypnosis and chemical mind control are used an awful lot.
 
* For a book that ends saying free will is a real thing, unstoppable hypnosis and chemical mind control are used an awful lot.
 
* Despite describing the future as being better in pretty much every way for the lives of the people of the future, Heinlein can't seem to help but inject a callous political position of how inefficient they are, as if efficiency is more important than happiness.
 
* Despite describing the future as being better in pretty much every way for the lives of the people of the future, Heinlein can't seem to help but inject a callous political position of how inefficient they are, as if efficiency is more important than happiness.
  
 
===Ugly===
 
===Ugly===
* I don't care that Ricky was 21 when she married Davis, the fact is, a thirty-year-old man fell in love with an eleven-year-old girl, and convinced her to go into stasis for 20 years even though she would live another ten without him, and yet he still had no trouble marrying her afterward. The author describing the girl as being, "emotionally an adult," doesn't help when he also writes about her acting like a child the whole time.
+
* Ordinarily, I don't have any serious qualms about about couple of disparate ages, but this one is pretty messed up. Yes, Ricky was 21 when she and 31-year-old Davis started having sex, but he fell in love with her when she was an eleven-year-old girl who viewed him as her uncle, and convinced her to live 10 years without him, then go into stasis for 20 years, and even though he knew nothing about the changes she went through as a teenager and young adult, they still got married the moment she got out of stasis. The author describing the girl as being, "emotionally an adult," doesn't help when he also writes about her acting like a child the whole time.
  
 
==Links==
 
==Links==

Revision as of 14:58, 15 August 2016

"Nerdy reclusive 30-something engineer finally makes good on his promise to marry an eleven-year-old girl thanks to time travel," is a good way to describe Robert A. Heinlein's 1957 novel, The Door Into Summer. Overall, I found the book boring, but it was also quite humorous, not because the author was trying to be funny, but for how far off he was describing future technology.

Review

Good

  • I like the idea of going back in time to fix mistakes that you made, even though the book does a poor job of making it interesting.
  • The fact that people with unpopular proclivities (nudists) can be successful members of society is a nice addition.

Bad

  • Davis, an engineering genius, is ingeniously boring. His only fault seems to be that he's too trusting. Well, that, and he's a pedophile.
  • The inventions Davis creates were not only impossible in the 1970s, but they were impossible in 2001, the book's "future."
  • Heinlein really missed the mark on future technology expecting high quality human stasis in the 1970s and the end of disease, colonized planets, and time travel by 2001. He also assumed that computers would still use tube-based memory in 2001, and that doctors would be offering their patients cigarettes in the hospital.
  • For a book that ends saying free will is a real thing, unstoppable hypnosis and chemical mind control are used an awful lot.
  • Despite describing the future as being better in pretty much every way for the lives of the people of the future, Heinlein can't seem to help but inject a callous political position of how inefficient they are, as if efficiency is more important than happiness.

Ugly

  • Ordinarily, I don't have any serious qualms about about couple of disparate ages, but this one is pretty messed up. Yes, Ricky was 21 when she and 31-year-old Davis started having sex, but he fell in love with her when she was an eleven-year-old girl who viewed him as her uncle, and convinced her to live 10 years without him, then go into stasis for 20 years, and even though he knew nothing about the changes she went through as a teenager and young adult, they still got married the moment she got out of stasis. The author describing the girl as being, "emotionally an adult," doesn't help when he also writes about her acting like a child the whole time.

Links