NationStates Jolt Archive

One of my favourite novels is Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein. To me, it mixes action and philosophy and takes a stand against fascism, examining a fascist future society and criticising many of its aspects. However, I've often come acros views that the novel is actually a pro-Fascist novel and that Heinlein was a fascist writer.

I know that everyones aspect of a novel is different, and that everyone gets something different from each text but that are your views on it? Pro-Fascist? Anti-Fascist? Just plain dull?

It's a good novel. Facist is not really the word I would use to describe Heinlein. He was a Navy officer and it shows, his societies are heavily militarized, everything follows a heavy order and strict procedure, and people are expected to follow those rules. Even in Stranger in a Strange Land Earth is in chaos for lack of order and the Martian is expected to create a new one. The perfect society (the Martians) are very orderly and structured.

So, he's more of a militaristic writer. I guess some aspects could be considered facists, but I don't think that's the best way to describe him.

i've only seen the movie but you can interperet it two ways: either a disgusting showcase about the wonders of a militaristic far-right society, or a brilliant parody of just that. i see it as very much the latter... and a great movie.

The book's philosophy and political stance is not as simple as many people think. They look at the skin, but don't taste the flesh of the apple.

This is not surprising. Most people are incapable of thinking critically. A pretty fair percentage don't think at all.

That was Heinlein's point, in fact. Most people are worthless, useless drones. They do their jobs, keep society running, but cannot be considered to have the judgement or sense to have a say in ruling it.

Heinlein's answer to this problem was to have everyone who was willing to risk their lives in the defence of society be citizens. But having been in the military, I know that there are stil plenty of drones there - just more aggressive drones.

Heinlein's philosophy is a good one. I just don't think his solution is sufficient.

The book's philosophy and political stance is not as simple as many people think. They look at the skin, but don't taste the flesh of the apple.

This is not surprising. Most people are incapable of thinking critically. A pretty fair percentage don't think at all.

That was Heinlein's point, in fact. Most people are worthless, useless drones. They do their jobs, keep society running, but cannot be considered to have the judgement or sense to have a say in ruling it.

Heinlein's answer to this problem was to have everyone who was willing to risk their lives in the defence of society be citizens. But having been in the military, I know that there are stil plenty of drones there - just more aggressive drones.

Heinlein's philosophy is a good one. I just don't think his solution is sufficient.

So you didn't see the book as a criticism of fascism or a militaristic state in any way?

In all honesty, no. I don't believe it was promotional to fascism, either; the point of being a citizen was to participate in the political process, after all, where fascism does everything in it's power to dissuade you from being involved in politics. Fascism wants drones - Heinlein was trying to escape from being dominated by drones.

Heinlein was also a noted hawk, decidedly pro-military. He saw an underregulated military as a problem, yes, but in this case he saw one solution being to incoroporate the military much more closely into society.

i've only seen the movie but you can interperet it two ways: either a disgusting showcase about the wonders of a militaristic far-right society, or a brilliant parody of just that. i see it as very much the latter... and a great movie.

The movie resembles the book almost exclusively in name only. The philosophical discussions that are the actual backbone of the book are completely ignored.

The book's philosophy and political stance is not as simple as many people think. They look at the skin, but don't taste the flesh of the apple.

Exactly so.

Didn't care for the book but damn I like the game.

The book, to me was pretty much saying 'the military is made of gods, the civilian population is worthless'. I agree that any member of society should be a contributor but the military is possibly the worst place to contribute.

Sure it's all cool if you are facing a race of Bugs who want to kill you all but if you find yourself dealing with a humanlike race it just leads to avoidable war.

In all honesty, no. I don't believe it was promotional to fascism, either; the point of being a citizen was to participate in the political process, after all, where fascism does everything in it's power to dissuade you from being involved in politics. Fascism wants drones - Heinlein was trying to escape from being dominated by drones.

Heinlein was also a noted hawk, decidedly pro-military. He saw an underregulated military as a problem, yes, but in this case he saw one solution being to incoroporate the military much more closely into society.

/Signed

My opinion as well. I didn't have to write it myself when I found yours ;)

Well, I liked Carl's uniform :D

The book is a good read and I'd interpret it as anti-fascist. Then again, some people call war movies anti-war when they are not, so it's all up to your personal interpretation, I'd say.

i've only seen the movie but you can interperet it two ways: either a disgusting showcase about the wonders of a militaristic far-right society, or a brilliant parody of just that. i see it as very much the latter... and a great movie.

read the book. it is a million times better.

I know that everyones aspect of a novel is different, and that everyone gets something different from each text but that are your views on it? Pro-Fascist? Anti-Fascist? Just plain dull?
I liked both the novel and the moive, although the movie had to stick in the usual Hollyweird rant against the military. :(

I don't think it's either "fascist" or "anti-fascist." One of its primary postulates is that becoming a citizen should carry responsibility. What a radical thought! Tsk! ;)

i've only seen the movie but you can interperet it two ways: either a disgusting showcase about the wonders of a militaristic far-right society, or a brilliant parody of just that. i see it as very much the latter... and a great movie.
I see it as very much the former... and one of the suckiest movies I ever had the displeasure to see. :p

I see it as very much the former... and one of the suckiest movies I ever had the displeasure to see. :p
how can people miss the parody? :confused:

and i love the movie! if anything just for the depth of the world constructed (ok it doesn't hold a candle to tolkein but still)... and the mindless action too! ;)

and i love the movie! if anything just for the depth of the world constructed

:confused:

Huh? You really need to sit down and read the book. The movie was a hateful, hollow, shallow shell that complete ignored and/or purposefully misrepresented the background reasoning and expository elements of the book.

and i love the movie! if anything just for the depth of the world constructed (ok it doesn't hold a candle to tolkein but still)... and the mindless action too! ;)

Methinks something else caught your eye as well. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v110/Doveofwar/dinameyer4.jpg)

:confused:

Huh? You really need to sit down and read the book. The movie was a hateful, hollow, shallow shell that complete ignored and/or purposefully misrepresented the background reasoning and expository elements of the book.
it certainly seems i should read the book, but that doesn't stop the movie being a wonderful parody of extreme right-wing politics. i especially enjoy the 'world' as it reminds me so much of starcraft :p

it certainly seems i should read the book, but that doesn't stop the movie being a wonderful parody of extreme right-wing politics. i especially enjoy the 'world' as it reminds me so much of starcraft :p

You really should. :D

Absolutely. It's a wonderful adventure story, with the political/philosophical elements well rendered and not too in your face.

While I enjoyed Starship Troopers in both book and movie form, Heinlein as a writer completely lost me when he started advocating incest in his later works.


Still, many of his earlier works are ones that stand out as great milestones in science fiction writing.

it certainly seems i should read the book, but that doesn't stop the movie being a wonderful parody of extreme right-wing politics. i especially enjoy the 'world' as it reminds me so much of starcraft :p

I too thought the movie was your run of the mill action flick until I did an essay on it, comparing it to Blade Runner. I savaged it quite a bit, but when I got it back, I looked through my Professors notes on the film, re-watched it, and realised how good it actually was.

Oh, it bares little resemblance to the book; Verhoeven said he couldn't read past the first chapter, after all. But in its own way it's very good. It pastiches the American love of mindless action movies, criticises fascism and the love of the military in society, and draws more than a few comparisons Triumph of The Wills.

However, I would recommend you read the book. It really is an excellent piece, and whether you think it's Heinleins perfect world, or a strong critique of a fascit, militaristic society, it's a must read. Better than Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep by miles.

Great film but I prefered the first one. Whats the book like?

While I enjoyed Starship Troopers in both book and movie form, Heinlein as a writer completely lost me when he started advocating incest in his later works.


Still, many of his earlier works are ones that stand out as great milestones in science fiction writing.

One more gratuitous misinterpretation of his work. He never advocated incest at all. All he did was indicate that the taboo against incest loses its reason for existence in a world with effective genetic screening.

Anyway, back to Starship Troopers. This was one of his earlier novels, and as such he was still developing a lot of his philosophy and world view when he wrote it. If you want to understand it better, try reading some of his later work, such as "I will fear no Evil", and then you will see where his thought was going. It is clearly a criticism of government control on the lives of the individual.

Yeah,but how many books have you finished and turned back to page one and read again. Damn few, but Starship Troopers is one of them.

Methinks something else caught your eye as well. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v110/Doveofwar/dinameyer4.jpg)
And she does have a beatiful chest, doesn't she :D:D:D

And she does have a beatiful chest, doesn't she?
Only until the larva hatch.