In the United States, we have such a thing as a judicial system. A convoluted mess of laws dictating what is legal, what is illegal, and the punishment for breaking the law for certain offenses. It is such a confusing system that we have jobs to simply understand the written word, and to memorize its tenants in order to defend others.
In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the moon has none of these problems. It has no written law, no lawyers, nothing. In a world of rational anarchy, there are only social customs. To break these customs, is in essence, to break laws. Rather than placing responsibility into the hands of lawyers, judges, and government, it brings that responsibility to individuals. Every man, woman, and child is responsible for their own actions, and how it affects others. Thus, nearly every offense can be considered capital. Here's a example:
In the book, a tourist meets a women in a bar. Since he doesn't know the local culture (and how immensely respected women are treated), he presses himself up on a woman and kisses her. Since this is next to unheard of in loonie culture, she screams. He is dragged through the tunnels by a group of young adults calling for "elimination". They encounter Manuel, and ask him to judge the proceedings. Everyone pays Manuel for accepting the responsibility of deciding a mans life, and tell how the events proceeded. Considering he is a tourist, and made no serious foul, he lets him off, and fines the boys for not knowing better. And everyone walks away happy.
Its a incredibly interesting system to go along with a interesting culture. On the moon, a man can be tossed out a airlock for something so trivial as insulting another man. On one hand, its barbaric! Men eliminating each other over calling their woman a slut? But on the other, it ensures a polite respectful society. No human would risk saying bigoted ideals, or try to proclaim insults to one another, because you'll be killed, and popular opinion would back up the one who tossed you out the airlock! And men don't go around murdering one another because then popular opinion would be against them, and then THEY would die!
In modern earth, the system might not work so well. We have an established culture, bound by centuries of tradition and imbedded culture. Murder is commonplace, and can be escaped by legal bureaucracy. But on the moon, a new environment where only the wardens guards held the guns, and were not needed for any reason by the common populace? Where society is put into tunnels, which all hold a purpose and have little to no "alleys"? Its a incredibly logical, and efficient system. It just goes to show how much work Heinlein put into thinking of the moon in the year 2075.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Sunday, March 31, 2013
TANSTAAFL
There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.
On the moon, everything requires money. Your food, your residence, your ice, your P-Suit, even the very air. Thus, was born tanstaafl. You get what you pay for in life, and its nowhere as true as on the moon.
In modern society, we have people known as "freeloaders". Those people living off government welfare, bums begging for handouts on the streets, people avoiding tax's, living in their parents basements, and so many more examples. These citizens prey off the honest working folk, and simply lazy their way through life.
And honestly? We enable them to do that. Sure, we rationalize it, but in the end we make it "ok" to be down and out.
So Heinlein comes through with a concept: What if everything was privately owned?
In the Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the moon is technically ruled by the Warden, a man who simply stays in the government complex all day and for the most part, does nothing. Even though the moon is a sort of prison, it has next to no guards. only around 30 in total. Why so few? because there is no escape! Ask yourself, what would happen if a man broke out of a cell on the moon? Nothing, because he couldn't leave. He couldn't even sneak back to earth, because its a death sentence. The moon is approximately .165 G, meaning around 1/6th of earth's gravity. Thus, an extended stay on the moon would result in muscle degradation, and physiological changes, rendering a human "stuck" on the moon. If they were to return to earth, they could not survive, because they have already adapted to the lower gravity.
So, the Warden has no need for guards. Thus, the people are left to themselves, so long as they don't interfere with the "Authority". What sprawls out of that mess, is rational anarchy. No government, no public services, no taxes. Heinlein presents a very interesting culture to go with this, but that is for another post. What comes out of this rational anarchy, is that every man is responsible for himself, and himself only. If you need to buy something, you buy it from people, not faceless companies. And if you mess up in your business, or wrong someone, then you personally are responsible, not the business. If you want insurance, you have to buy it from someone. If you want a new tunnel built, you have to buy it yourself, or build it yourself. If you want a pension? You have to buy one. A mindset appears with this sort of thinking; "The worst thing you can do for a hungry man is to feed him". Because on the moon, tanstaafl. A person is expected to work to survive, and if you refuse to work, then you die. Black and white. The concept of charity doesn't exist on the moon! If a "loonie" does not have the common sense to try to find work to feed himself, and to provide for himself, then he is weeded out through classic Darwinian philosophy.
Its a interesting thought to say the least. In modern society, we would call it barbaric, to have capital punishment for something so simple. But consider the society of the moon. Descendants of convicts, political exiles, or recently brought up from earth. Left alone to their own devices. Modern thinking would imagine them all to be in gangs and killing each other. However, they almost seem to thrive. The reason? Everyone works for themselves, and doesn't bother anyone else, the beauty of rational anarchy. Tanstaafl.
On the moon, everything requires money. Your food, your residence, your ice, your P-Suit, even the very air. Thus, was born tanstaafl. You get what you pay for in life, and its nowhere as true as on the moon.
In modern society, we have people known as "freeloaders". Those people living off government welfare, bums begging for handouts on the streets, people avoiding tax's, living in their parents basements, and so many more examples. These citizens prey off the honest working folk, and simply lazy their way through life.
And honestly? We enable them to do that. Sure, we rationalize it, but in the end we make it "ok" to be down and out.
So Heinlein comes through with a concept: What if everything was privately owned?
In the Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the moon is technically ruled by the Warden, a man who simply stays in the government complex all day and for the most part, does nothing. Even though the moon is a sort of prison, it has next to no guards. only around 30 in total. Why so few? because there is no escape! Ask yourself, what would happen if a man broke out of a cell on the moon? Nothing, because he couldn't leave. He couldn't even sneak back to earth, because its a death sentence. The moon is approximately .165 G, meaning around 1/6th of earth's gravity. Thus, an extended stay on the moon would result in muscle degradation, and physiological changes, rendering a human "stuck" on the moon. If they were to return to earth, they could not survive, because they have already adapted to the lower gravity.
So, the Warden has no need for guards. Thus, the people are left to themselves, so long as they don't interfere with the "Authority". What sprawls out of that mess, is rational anarchy. No government, no public services, no taxes. Heinlein presents a very interesting culture to go with this, but that is for another post. What comes out of this rational anarchy, is that every man is responsible for himself, and himself only. If you need to buy something, you buy it from people, not faceless companies. And if you mess up in your business, or wrong someone, then you personally are responsible, not the business. If you want insurance, you have to buy it from someone. If you want a new tunnel built, you have to buy it yourself, or build it yourself. If you want a pension? You have to buy one. A mindset appears with this sort of thinking; "The worst thing you can do for a hungry man is to feed him". Because on the moon, tanstaafl. A person is expected to work to survive, and if you refuse to work, then you die. Black and white. The concept of charity doesn't exist on the moon! If a "loonie" does not have the common sense to try to find work to feed himself, and to provide for himself, then he is weeded out through classic Darwinian philosophy.
Its a interesting thought to say the least. In modern society, we would call it barbaric, to have capital punishment for something so simple. But consider the society of the moon. Descendants of convicts, political exiles, or recently brought up from earth. Left alone to their own devices. Modern thinking would imagine them all to be in gangs and killing each other. However, they almost seem to thrive. The reason? Everyone works for themselves, and doesn't bother anyone else, the beauty of rational anarchy. Tanstaafl.
Heinlands writing style
First off, a note: I have now read through the entire novel. And it was excellent! Thus, all future posts will be from a "review" perspective rather than a co-current one. I have already written down some of the parts of the book I want to cover, and I will be writing them over the next few days.
Heinlein is a interesting Sci-Fi writer. He is definitely not my favorite for a good many of reasons, that honor will always go to Alastair Reynolds. But, he does accomplish the one thing that Sci-Fi, TRUE Sci-Fi is galaxy bound to do:
Present 'Concepts'.
A truly good Sci-Fi novel will open up your mind to the future, to the infinite plausible possibilities of what mankind can accomplish, or the horrifying implications of technological developments. And in this light, Heinlein shines brighter than a supernova. In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Heinlein presents the concept of a occupied moon, but one where the moon is used as a exile camp. Where undesirables and convicts are sent up. What kind of culture would develop? Economic possibilities? Technology? Structure? Very few things are left unconsidered by Heinlein. Here, Heinlein gets a 10/10 in Moon is a Harsh Mistress
But as a novel, who's purpose is to engage the reader on a fundamental emotional level, it fails.
Heinlein's main fault lies in his writing style. Comparing this to the one other experience I have had with him (Stranger in a Strange Land), the characters were predictable and overall very boring, because the two books were so alike!. Throughout the course of the book, though I could see the characters changing on a surface level, they felt static! Manuel, though he goes from a keep to himself computer technician and mechanic to a responsibility laden "Free Lunar Defense Minister", he still feels like boring old Manuel, with nothing changed but a few phrases he tosses around and some emotional problems you "hear" about, but you don't "see" them, nor "feel" their impact. In essence, the "Logical but good hearted protagonist who unknowingly starts off something massive".
You see, Heinlein has a formula. Or at least from what I can tell from my experience. The unknowing intelligent protagonist, the "above human" co-protagonist (often very intelligent), the old intellectual who helps the protagonists, the intelligent woman love interest, and the intelligent but flawed authority figure villain.
See a pattern?
The result is that nearly every character brought into the story, even minor ones, is either A. logical and intelligent or B. A massive prejudiced bigot. To the point where it seems almost comical. During one section of the novel where the Professor is trying to present his case to the F.N committee (Federal Nations, essentially the UN of the future) for a free moon, one member described as being from "north america" seems like his sole purpose there is to throw base insults at the Professor and the moon! In a courtroom environment! So case and point.
In his writing, there is little of that delectable "Grey zone", where the true meat of human society is. His characters feel inhuman, because they lack easily visible flaws. They know what to say, when to say it, and how to say it. And they only seem to make mistakes when the protagonists often naive nature of certain matters is brought into play. For example, Manuel takes a trip down to earth with the professor to try to convince the F.N Committee (Federal nations) to recognize the Luna Government. While down there, traveling, he talks with this woman, who brings up the subject of marriages. On the moon, polygamy is a accepted practice, as men outnumber women 2:1. So women are treated with respect, and often a woman will take multiple husbands. So he informs her of this fact, and asks for a picture of his family. Next day, Manual is arrested for illegal polygamy, and the papers are making insults about Lunar women.
Overall, Heinlein is a amazing writer. One of my favorites. There are far too many sci-fi novels who simply use sci-fi as an excuse to have their war stories with spaceships and teleporters. Heinlein gets to the true purpose of sci-fi, as a writers tool to bring forth "what if?" scenarios, and make them feel like this could really be a future in store for mankind.
Heinlein is a interesting Sci-Fi writer. He is definitely not my favorite for a good many of reasons, that honor will always go to Alastair Reynolds. But, he does accomplish the one thing that Sci-Fi, TRUE Sci-Fi is galaxy bound to do:
Present 'Concepts'.
A truly good Sci-Fi novel will open up your mind to the future, to the infinite plausible possibilities of what mankind can accomplish, or the horrifying implications of technological developments. And in this light, Heinlein shines brighter than a supernova. In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Heinlein presents the concept of a occupied moon, but one where the moon is used as a exile camp. Where undesirables and convicts are sent up. What kind of culture would develop? Economic possibilities? Technology? Structure? Very few things are left unconsidered by Heinlein. Here, Heinlein gets a 10/10 in Moon is a Harsh Mistress
But as a novel, who's purpose is to engage the reader on a fundamental emotional level, it fails.
Heinlein's main fault lies in his writing style. Comparing this to the one other experience I have had with him (Stranger in a Strange Land), the characters were predictable and overall very boring, because the two books were so alike!. Throughout the course of the book, though I could see the characters changing on a surface level, they felt static! Manuel, though he goes from a keep to himself computer technician and mechanic to a responsibility laden "Free Lunar Defense Minister", he still feels like boring old Manuel, with nothing changed but a few phrases he tosses around and some emotional problems you "hear" about, but you don't "see" them, nor "feel" their impact. In essence, the "Logical but good hearted protagonist who unknowingly starts off something massive".
You see, Heinlein has a formula. Or at least from what I can tell from my experience. The unknowing intelligent protagonist, the "above human" co-protagonist (often very intelligent), the old intellectual who helps the protagonists, the intelligent woman love interest, and the intelligent but flawed authority figure villain.
See a pattern?
The result is that nearly every character brought into the story, even minor ones, is either A. logical and intelligent or B. A massive prejudiced bigot. To the point where it seems almost comical. During one section of the novel where the Professor is trying to present his case to the F.N committee (Federal Nations, essentially the UN of the future) for a free moon, one member described as being from "north america" seems like his sole purpose there is to throw base insults at the Professor and the moon! In a courtroom environment! So case and point.
In his writing, there is little of that delectable "Grey zone", where the true meat of human society is. His characters feel inhuman, because they lack easily visible flaws. They know what to say, when to say it, and how to say it. And they only seem to make mistakes when the protagonists often naive nature of certain matters is brought into play. For example, Manuel takes a trip down to earth with the professor to try to convince the F.N Committee (Federal nations) to recognize the Luna Government. While down there, traveling, he talks with this woman, who brings up the subject of marriages. On the moon, polygamy is a accepted practice, as men outnumber women 2:1. So women are treated with respect, and often a woman will take multiple husbands. So he informs her of this fact, and asks for a picture of his family. Next day, Manual is arrested for illegal polygamy, and the papers are making insults about Lunar women.
Overall, Heinlein is a amazing writer. One of my favorites. There are far too many sci-fi novels who simply use sci-fi as an excuse to have their war stories with spaceships and teleporters. Heinlein gets to the true purpose of sci-fi, as a writers tool to bring forth "what if?" scenarios, and make them feel like this could really be a future in store for mankind.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Heinlein and sexual taboo's
I've noticed something interesting about Heinlein works. Well, from my meager two books so far (Stranger in a strange land, and now The moon is a harsh mistress). He has a little bit of a obsession with tackling the social taboo of sex and sensuality in culture. Note I mean this in the most unjudgemental way possible. For example, in Stranger in a Strange Land, the main protagonist is a martian who is named Valentine. Over the course of the novel, he begins to develop his own culture as he begins to "Grok" human culture and its failings. In the end this metamorphosis results in his own church, the "Church of all Worlds". It is very reminicent of our modern day hippy culture. Free love, no judgement on individuals and what they choose to do, etc. But Heinlein places special attention on the sole fact that it seems like everyone lets their husbands and wives (traditionally a closed relationship) allow them to have sex with others, and be perfectly calm with it!
This has also been drawn into The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, as less than 50 pages in its revealed that the main protagonist Manuel Garcias, also known as Mannie, is part of a Line family, with 17 children and 4 wives. On top of that, it appears that Mannie's new friend (and obvious future love interest) Wyoming works as a "host mother" for a living, and had prior been married to two brothers.
Call me a hippie, but I find these concepts interesting to me, as I believe that many social problems in modern day society are sprung from jealousy of others, especially when coming to relationships. Often this simply boils down to "he has her and I don't, so I'm mad about it". Thus, when everyone has everyone, then the problem disappears entirely. Of course my view is very romanticized, so take it with a grain of salt. This concept of polygamy and the destruction of the social taboo of sex, sensuality, and polygamy was much more prevalent in Stranger in a Strange Land, but its obvious even this soon in the novel that it has been transferred over to a lesser degree in this book as well.
I just wonder WHY he brings these points into this novel. Sure they add a little flavor, a little double take for the initial read, but I don't see how the concept was absolutely necessary to add into The Moon is a Harsh Mistress as well. Perhaps it will stop being brought up after a couple more pages and descend into the background. Or perhaps it will become a focal point. I'll have to read.
On another note, I am 47 pages in, and I am enjoying the book. It has the classic touch of Heinlein, and brings forth a lot of interesting points, details, and questions about moon colonization. And more importantly, the sociological development of humans in such a environment. I'll bring that up in the next post.
This has also been drawn into The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, as less than 50 pages in its revealed that the main protagonist Manuel Garcias, also known as Mannie, is part of a Line family, with 17 children and 4 wives. On top of that, it appears that Mannie's new friend (and obvious future love interest) Wyoming works as a "host mother" for a living, and had prior been married to two brothers.
Call me a hippie, but I find these concepts interesting to me, as I believe that many social problems in modern day society are sprung from jealousy of others, especially when coming to relationships. Often this simply boils down to "he has her and I don't, so I'm mad about it". Thus, when everyone has everyone, then the problem disappears entirely. Of course my view is very romanticized, so take it with a grain of salt. This concept of polygamy and the destruction of the social taboo of sex, sensuality, and polygamy was much more prevalent in Stranger in a Strange Land, but its obvious even this soon in the novel that it has been transferred over to a lesser degree in this book as well.
I just wonder WHY he brings these points into this novel. Sure they add a little flavor, a little double take for the initial read, but I don't see how the concept was absolutely necessary to add into The Moon is a Harsh Mistress as well. Perhaps it will stop being brought up after a couple more pages and descend into the background. Or perhaps it will become a focal point. I'll have to read.
On another note, I am 47 pages in, and I am enjoying the book. It has the classic touch of Heinlein, and brings forth a lot of interesting points, details, and questions about moon colonization. And more importantly, the sociological development of humans in such a environment. I'll bring that up in the next post.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress
I will be reading this book independently, though I promise to be raising provocative questions. I can be quite good at rambling at times.
Book: The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein. (can't go wrong with Heinlein!)
Reading schedule:
Start: Wensday, 3/20
Finish: Sunday, 3/31
I am unsure how many posts you are looking for? I'll inquire tomorrow in class.
Book: The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein. (can't go wrong with Heinlein!)
Reading schedule:
Start: Wensday, 3/20
Finish: Sunday, 3/31
I am unsure how many posts you are looking for? I'll inquire tomorrow in class.
Let he with sin cast the first stone! Wait....
This is Eric Johnson's blog for my book.... Which I have not chosen yet... I'll get on that tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)