Beyond This Horizon

Here we have the story of a future dystopian society with shades of Brave New World-esque classism/racism at perhaps his penultimate peak and an effort to overthrow it and return to a darker time as seen through the eyes of our protagonists.
Beyond this Horizon is one of Heinlein's earlier, non-juvenile, works. While many of his later themes are present, its clear he's still working out some of his political and philosophical ideas.
As is the case with any Heinlein, there is certainly misogyny, an unfortunate seeming fondness for both libertarianism and fascism (somehow), and in this case some definite hints of racism/elitism/classism.
However, due to being an early work, I think this and several other works give us what may be hints that show more Heinlein perhaps did not agree as wholeheartedly with some of those distasteful ideas we believe due to his mouthpiece characters espousing them. Maybe even that, in some way, he's 'devil advocate'-ing these ideas and philosophy.
A good example of this is the oft-(partially)quoted by the NRA passage about a polite society being an armed society. Besides the issues with it only being a fragment of a quote, and lacking context, there are certainly contradictions presented here. From everything he wrote, we see Heinlein viewing being armed, and even personal violence, as perhaps fitting with interpretation of the quote presented by gun advocates. However, the individual making that statement in this very book insists he prefers to go unarmed, and that sort of personal violence should be considered crass and distasteful, that we would better off if no one was armed.
There are similar contradictions in his famously negative view of socialism and pro-capitalist/libertarian stance. While as usual characters may denigrate socialism vocally here, we also see that this post-scarcity utopian society only continues to function as a 'capitalist' one because annually wealth is redistributed among the population based on complex computations, and that the government is continually looking for projects that benefit and enrich society as a whole to throw money at, since 'production' is largely unnecessary. These are very socialist ideas, and presented in a very positive light...but are somehow still framed as being capitalist?
If for no other reason than looking at these contradictions that either indicate Heinlein is still working out his ideas, or had been playing devil's advocate all those years in some kind of grand jest, this is definitely worth reading. show less

https://nwhyte.livejournal.com/3028741.html

This is early Heinlein, his second novel for adults (after Sixth Column/The Day After Tomorrow, the one with the racist ray). Here we have a future society whose population has been and is being shaped by genetic engineering, which raises interesting questions about accountability, which are not really answered. The plot starts promisingly but diverts often into info-dumping and runs out of steam entirely about half-way through. A side-theme is the universal use of fire-arms, at least by men; this is the source of the infamous quote “An armed society is a polite society.” Heinlein's writing style is already lucid and effective, but he hadn't yet found the knack of pulling story elements show more together to a coherent whole at novel length. show less

My wife and I like to read "retro" sci-fi once or twice a year. We've got a ton of it on our shelves. Some of them hold up well, others not so much, but it's almost always entertaining to be reminded about how much society has changed, usually in respect to gender roles.

This one was strange. It was almost like 2 separate books. There's an "actiony" first half and then a philosophical second half. They have the same characters and the background is the same, but the plots are totally different. It's almost like he wrote the first half and then it ended but was too short so he found another angle to write about.

On the pro side, there were some great one liners. On the con side, there were some long passages of the science of genes, dna, show more recessive traits etc... where it felt like I was reading a text book for biology class.

So I would recommend this one to die-hard Heinlein fans. show less

It's time to prepare for the 1943 retro Hugo awards that will be presented in 2018! (Why? Why not? Some books deserve love even if they're before the Hugos even began!)

In this case, novels published in 1942 are eligible. Books like C.S. Lewis's Screwtape Letters are technically eligible but really shouldn't be. There's nothing much SF about the religious satire.

On the other hand, I really enjoyed Olaf Stapledon's anti-novel and worldbuilding masterpiece The Darkness and the Light that came out this year and please imagine how thrilled I was to learn that Heinlein also published a bona fide adult-oriented novel, too!

He was generally known for his Juveniles by this point, so an early adult novel is something of a treat. And fortunately, show more his writing is always polished and clear and sometimes funny and always full of light agendas. It's Heinlein! He's a very opinionated man. :)

In this case, we're treated to science lessons on genetics and a superior-gene race of humanity planning on overthrowing the current Utopia. The hero is the ultimate perfect superman and I kept thinking about the Howard families in his later fiction, the prototype that gets so fully explored later.

We shouldn't forget the day. 1942.
Does this kind of story sound familiar? In Heinlein's case, it feels like a mirror to a huge segment of the American population that already agreed with the Eugenics movement and what was happening in Europe at the time. Maybe no one really understood the impact or scope or even the reality of the death camps, but everyone could see the implications and the stated goals. It was war and knowing the publishing field, there's a long stretch between when a writer finishes a text and when it actually gets put on the shelves. I'll assume for a moment that Pearl Harbor had not happened yet, or if it did, there was no way Heinlein could have fixed his novel to reflect America's sudden inclusion in the war.

However, it should be noted that he got all the salient points and sentiments RIGHT. It might have been a utopia like Stapledon's work but unlike Stapledon, he went the full "good story" option with interesting characters, exciting plots, cool snags, romance, and a big blowout. :)

Without even mentioning the Hugos or the need to find the best SF or Fantasy of 1942, I would have read this early Heinlein novel thinking that it's a very polished introduction to his later genetic-field obsession with longevity.

No Lazarus Long here, but enough ideas were packed in here to stand proudly with any of his later works. :)

Between Stapledon and Heinlein, I choose Heinlein for the sheer fun factor, the timeliness of the topic, the sophistication of the storytelling, and lastly, the idea. :) Stapledon might blow him out of the water for sheer scope and range of ideas and world-building and commentary, but Heinlein's soup had the perfect mix.

He's my main choice for the Hugo. :) So far. I'm still reading, however. :) show less

Yeah, it's kind of a mess. And remember Heinlein has a certain sort of disturbingly sexist attitude, doesn't understand women at all - certainly the only armed one is seen as, erm, eccentric, to put it mildly.

Females don't need guns because men (aka people) are all about being protective and chivalrous... except when they're spanking the girls or otherwise dominating them, that is. I did like "Women will forgive anything. Otherwise the race would have died out long ago." And he gets a few other things right, like how to read that resource which replaces newspapers. And I appreciate his view of amiable eugenics, as it seems carefully thought out given the context of the times.

(For example, this was written a few years before it was show more figured out that genes are made of DNA, and well before the structure of DNA was determined to be the double helix. And so, the methods of genetic selection described are, erm, interesting.)

Heinlein is well-read, and clever. It could be argued that he's smart. He's not wise, though.

And finance is not his forte; is description of the Utopia in which nobody goes hungry and the government prints more money when statisticians tell it to is implausible. "A polite society is an armed society" is nonsense. The low incidence of atheism is quaint.

But mostly it's both BS and lame. I guess I'll keep working through the stack of Heinlein books I own, but without high hopes for the enjoyment I'd expect given his popularity, and given the fact that I do remember liking him when I was a teen.

Editing to add a comment I made below which imo needs to be seen more widely:

Bear in mind that there's a lot of even older fiction, for boys and girls, men and women, that is not so sexist and otherwise problematic.

"A product of its time" is something people with less understanding of history and the history of literature and storytelling say to excuse the weaknesses of the books they enjoy.

It's not a good argument for reading or recommending garbage. The state of SF today would be better had Heinlein less success. show less

My reactions to reading this novel in 1994. Spoilers follow.

I originally read this novel because it contains, David Brin said in an essay on gun control, Heinlein’s famous remark, “An armed society is a polite society.” I expected an extended rumination on the viability of a society which allows private force. Armed citizens, their duels, and the corresponding social conventions and manners are only a very small part of this part.

What this book really is the most extreme of Heinlein’s preoccupation with genetic influences on human behavior and his desire – as Charles Brown put it – to reconcile morals and religion. One of Heinlein’s political concerns – the nature and preservation of liberty – is also on display here show more with the idea of an armed citizenry, but this novel is a better exemplar of a rationalistic school of sf stories from the 40s and 30s pulps – especially Astounding – that featured societies centrally planned – either politically or economically or both. (In the most famous example – Isaac Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy – the society’s future is planned.).

It seems to be a rather socialistic society, at least from the standpoint of government doles, a central planning organization (whose pretensions to complete knowledge, albeit aided by computers, would have F.A. Hayek smirking), diversion of money to projects that produce nothing and a scene featuring a man from the twentieth century who remarks the world is not run on Adam Smith’s principles. I can’t help thinking that this book was written at a time when Heinlein was somewhat enamored of communism.. Also, the society of his The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is noticeably more libertarian. It is also a society which concerns itself with state run eugenics. (Not in a coercive sense, though one genetic planner wishes she could force hero Hamilton Felix to reproduce.) Parents consciously try to genetically improve their children.

While the biological science and genetic manipulation technology have obviously dated, I’m not sure that some of Heinlein’s points on genetics – that some traits are the result of a complex of genes and some traits not easily linked to genetic influence – are invalid though, of course, he optimistically postulates being able to pin down genetic influences on math ability, for instance. Others receive large payments to be “control naturals” and take their chances with physical ailments genetically weeded out. The main thrust of all this is the betterment of the human race because, as Heinlein says, good times for the individual are not good times for the genetic hardiness of the race since natural selection pressure is functioning. Therefore, artificial selection must replace it. There is a brief description of the First Genetic Wars and the Second Genetic War where the “Empire of the Great Khans” produced genetically superior soldiers under a hive-like totalitarian state. They failed due to overspecialization.

Much of the story is taken up by a revolt of malcontents who wish to impose a coercive eugenics on society. They fail because they simply don’t have the intelligence to succeed and are motivated by fantasies which ignore the complexity of running this rather utopian state. In effect, they haven’t been bred for it like characters Claude Mordan and Monroe Alpha-Clifford (genetics and economic planners respectively). (I think this novel gets an unfair rap for allegedly stating that no revolution, in Darwinian terms, deserves to succeed that doesn’t succeed. I don’t see that as being stated.). Even more of the book is concerned with Hamilton’s existential crises as he wonders what the purpose of life is, what the point of humanity’s survival is, and why science concerns itself with only the how and not the why of existence. Pretty big – and, at least initially to Claude Mordan, unanswerable questions Mordan’s wife goes so far as to say only a psychopathic personality would dwell on them. But have no fear, science and rational planning comes up with the answer. Through the culmination of Mordan’s plan to marry Felix to his fifth cousin and advance the genetic “star line”, Felix learns that the purpose of life is to pass on a legacy physical and genetic, to help the race survive, and gain knowledge. One character embarks on a project to model, with mathematics and instrumentality – a “Grand Eidouranium – the entire universe to answer questions like the distribution of life. He marries his cousin and has kids.

It’s in this last respect that, to my mind, the novel becomes absurd in its faith not only in rational social planning but the power of science to answer every question – for Felix helps turn the resources of society loose on getting questions on the nature of telepathy and survival after death. Science, in this novel, can provide the answers to everything and plan and model everything. This may be one of the most extreme expressions of that trend in sf at the time.

Still, it was an interesting read. Stylistically, this story lacks the slickly inserted explication of Heinlein’s later works through there are plenty of lectures by characters. Heinlein’s characteristically dazzling and strange dialogue only shows up between Felix and his wife here. show less

This book is densely packed with philosophical musings on the nature of society and of man. It is both utopian and dis-utopian. It shows what happens after a few centuries of selective genetic breeding-- not genetic engineering, precisely, but a long-term view of breeding to promote certain traits. But what happens when a "star line" person declines to procreate for philosophical reasons?

My favorite quotation: "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." This is followed by an explanation of how dueling is good for natural selection. I love it!

This book shows its age well, with one significant exception. If you didn't know what year it was written in, you would not be show more able to guess within about 50 years. The significant exception is the treatment of women, who are allowed to be brilliant and have meaningful careers, and even be part of the highest level of policy makers-- but who nevertheless play a decidedly subsidiary role to the men whom the book is about. In this respect the book remains firmly rooted in the first half of the twentieth century. show less