Rating: 
Summary: Historically Interesting Infodump
Review: Robert Heinlein is my favorite author. I was thrilled when I heard I would get a new novel 15 years after his death. Unfortunately, there is very little of a story in this book. When Heinlein is actually telling a story here, it is worthwhile. The story though, where Heinlein correctly follows the advice of "show, don't tell", consists of short passages between very long lectures and exposition on the philosophy and mechanics of America in 2086. Through some of these lectures, Heinlein's authorial voice is strong and entertaining in the mode of Jubal Harshaw/Kettle Belly Baldwin/Professor. Just as many though are long-winded and tedious, particularly the one explaining the Social Credit economic system. The seeds of his later works are sown here, and fairly obvious to pick out. This however would be no consolation to the average reader not familiar with Heinlein. Sadly, I can recommend this only to Heinlein completists interested in his very first work. It is good for us all that he improved so much.
Rating: 
Summary: For Heinlein Fans
Review: Spider Robinson's introduction pretty much says it all about this lost novel of Robert Heinlein's. It's not really a completed novel, per se, and clearly lays out a lot of the ideas Heinlein later pursued in other novels and short stories. The publication of this work was clearly for people already very familiar with Heinlein's writing. I would highly recommend that those who have not read Heinlein NOT start with this novel. Of course, all Heinlein fans will want to check it out to see the embryo of his later works.
Rating: 
Summary: For Heinlein's Children
Review: That's what the book's dedication says, and it's accurate. You won't agree with my five-star rating unless you're in the publisher's target audience, so be warned: my rating is _not_ based on 'literary quality' and your mileage will _definitely_ vary. Strictly, I have to count myself one of those 'Children'. I was born in 1963, learned to read very young, and cut my literary-intellectual teeth on _Stranger_ and _Mistress_; moreover, this fact is so significant in my personal development that it's something you _must_ know if you want to grok the way my mind works even today, some forty years later. (Spider Robinson remarks somewhere that RAH was the one who took his 'literary virginity'. Same here.) So whatever issues I may happen to have with the Old Man -- and believe me, I do have some -- I'm most definitely one of the readers at whom this book is aimed. And I highly recommend it to any of Heinlein's _other_ Children out there. To the rest of you, it will be at most of historical interest, so wait for the paperback. If you're reading this page, you already know what the book is: it's Heinlein's first novel-length writing (though Spider's warm and perceptive introduction suggests that it may not be a 'novel' proper). You've probably already read the comparisons with Edward Bellamy's _Looking Backward_ and H.G. Wells's _When the Sleeper Wakes_. Here I'll simply confirm that those comparisons are apt; Heinlein's unpublished 1939 work, a look at the 'past' from an imagined future, is essentially a sociopolitical tract wrapped up in a bit of story to make the medicine go down a little more easily. The protagonist, Perry Nelson (whose double-admiral name is presumably a two-gun salute to a couple of Heinlein's naval forebears, though neither the MS nor the commentary explicitly makes this connection), is basically a cardboard figure, and so is his companion-of-the-future Diana. _As_ a tract, it's pretty interesting. As a story, it's not very, and although there are occasional hints of the writer Heinlein was to become, you wouldn't notice them if you weren't familiar with his later work. What's _really_ interesting is something that will appeal only to those 'Children' of his. I've thought through my entire shelf of Heinlein novels and I can't think of a _single one_ that doesn't have _some_ roots in the ideas set forth in this manuscript. Why, there are a few elements here that don't resurface until _Stranger_. Most of us have long suspected (hell, known) that the Old Man was deliberately lecturing us in those books of his, no matter how many times he swore up and down that his sole purpose was to entertain. (And no matter how many times his most zealous defenders insisted we couldn't infer anything about Heinlein's own opinions from those of his characters.) But until this MS was published, we didn't have much direct evidence that Heinlein himself accepted and wanted to propagate the ideas set forth by, say, Col. Baslim, Col. DuBois, Jubal Harshaw, Professor de la Paz, and Lazarus Long. You may not buy all of those ideas yourself; I don't either. But anybody who grew up reading Heinlein's stuff has to credit him for stretching our minds so far out of shape that we will never, as long as we live, lapse into simple-minded moralistic conventionality. About anything. (The 1960s owe much of their experimentation with convention to a handful of famous and not-so-famous minds from the previous generation or two; Lord Bertrand Russell was one of the famous ones and Paul Blanshard -- twin brother of philosopher Brand Blanshard -- was one of the not-so-famous. Heinlein is on that shortlist; without _Stranger_, much of the ensuing decade wouldn't have unfolded quite as it did.) I also don't mean to suggest that Heinlein's ideas didn't change _at all_ over the next fifty years. Certainly they did; at the very least, as he himself remarked in the late 1950s (and as Robert James reminds us in his afterword), he turned from a 'soft-headed radical' into a 'hard-headed radical, a pragmatic libertarian'. But those radical (and libertarian) themes had been present in Heinlein's writing from the very beginning; in Spider's apt analogy, this MS contains their DNA. In his life as a fiction writer, Heinlein had to wait another twenty years before his ideas even became publishable -- and even then it was largely because he had personally laid the groundwork for them. His predictions herein are in some cases uncannily accurate, but he flops in one surprising and deeply ironic respect: as of 2086 there _hasn't yet been a moon landing_. Hee hee. (But in 1939 Heinlein successfully predicted both Hitler's suicide and the development of a united Europe with its own currency. The details are wrong, but still . . .) Don't skip the 'Social Credit' economic arguments either. If you disagree with them, see if you can spot where they go wrong (if they do). I'm generally not a huge fan of Heinlein's nonfiction writings and I'm very, very glad he turned to fiction. (Even on strictly scientific matters, Asimov's reputation as the Great Explainer was never in much danger from RAH.) Nevertheless I think that in its treatiselike aspects, this 'novel' is one of his best _nonfiction_ works. At the least, the underlying theories are better thought out than in any of his later nonfiction. But overall, what will be of interest to the 'Children' is that in this MS, we can see Heinlein (in the language that Spider borrows from Zelazny's _Lord of Light_, as he does whenever he wants to talk about something like this) put on his Aspect and raise up his Attribute. This MS dates from the time that Heinlein _became_ the writer of speculative fiction that drove us to the Moon. Reading it is like stepping into a time machine and going back to meet a young John Lennon picking up his first guitar. If you're one of Heinlein's Children, don't miss this MS. Everybody else can afford to wait a while. But don't wait _too_ long -- or you'll be left behind when the rest of us escape to the stars.
Rating: 
Summary: For die-hard Heinlein fans only
Review: There isn't much story to this story, and there sure isn't any comedy, but for the Heinlein fan who just can't get enough of Heinlein's criticism of 20th century politics, sex, religion and economics - well, this book's for you!
Rating:
Summary: Novelized philosophy
Review: This book was a quick and entertaining read. I quite enjoy philosophy communicated through a novel (rather than an essay), for example the novels by Ayn Rand, Orwell or Huxley. As any other philosophical book, expect many points where you'll disagree or feel that the author is missing the point. Some reviews say that the title "For us, the living" is a wink to "We, the living" but I didn't find much similarity. Ayn Rand's book is fiercely anti-communist while Heinlein's proposals are rather socialistic (capitalism with extremely strong state intervention in the economy, like the Western European social democrats). The style is quite different too, the only similarity would be that both authors are using novels as a tool for philosophy (even in this respect, this book would be closer to The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged) If you like "social" and "philosophical" science fiction and don't mind some imperfection of a "beginner's novel" you'll enjoy this book. If you're looking for "action" and "story" or you think that novelized philosophy books are "boring lectures", you'd better skip this book.
Rating:
Summary: Heinlein Brings up Many Original Ideas
Review: Time-traveling books have always been a fascination of mine. In Heinein's tale, the lead character, Perry Nelson, leaves his present FDR-period of 1939 for 2086. It is always wise to consider that one's vision of the future is plagued by some of the events of the time period. That is, even a book about the future is tied intrinsically to the period in which it was written. I'm sure Mr. Nelson could never have imagined the internet, for instance, and it is not brought up. However, Mr. Heinen does bring up a number of interesting points that appear to have rung true over time: he believes that the state should not involve itself at all with "private" matters such as sexual relations or even the definition of marriage. (Twenty years after he wrote this book, in the 1960s, a generation actually made sure his message became true). Heinen also explores the idea that people will correct the difficult spelling used in many English words. We'll write words exactly as we hear them. It's interesting that Mr. Heinlein thinks it would take so long to bring man to outerspace -- roughly 151 years into his future. It's quite surprising that he did not think it may have happened sooner. It is true as many have said that there is not a lot of plot to this book, and there isn't. However, it offers a rare glimpse into the mind of someone writing in that time period and conjures up some radical ideas. Michael Gordon
Rating: 
Summary: 'and the First Shall Be Last
Review: When I first heard the news that this, Heinlein's first and thought to be lost novel, had been discovered and would soon be published, I was ecstatic. Having read everything ever published by him, the thought of having new words from the master of science fiction was a great lift to my spirits. Now having this work in my hands, my happiness has not diminished, even though this 'novel' is fraught with flaws. This work is not the place to start reading Heinlein; its place in his pantheon can only really be appreciated after having read many of his other works. In some ways, this work is something like H.G. Wells When the Sleeper Wakes, with its major plot line of Perry, a normal 1939 engineer, reviving after a car accident in the year 2086. With this as a starting point, much of the book focuses on the changes and events that have occurred during the intervening years. Presented here is a fascinating set of prognostications, from a united Europe (quite different from today's attempt at unification), to an America that took a brief fling with a religious autocracy. Hitler's final fate, and the duration of WWII, is eerily foretold. Some of the foreseen advances in technology are startling ' advanced cooking methods, personal air-cars, rolling roads, even a primitive form of the internet ' some of which have actually come to pass, others seem just as far away as when this was written. A significant (and highly atypical) failure in prediction, though, is that by 2086, man had still not traveled to the moon. It is very clear that this was some of Heinlein's earliest attempts at writing, as just about all the above is presented as expository blocks of dialog by one or another of those people who have undertaken the task of bringing Perry up to date, rather than being material presented as part of the story, a trick he later mastered possibly better than any other science fiction writer. For those who have read some of Heinlein's other works, though, this material, even though it interrupts the story and is presented in large, nearly indigestible blocks, is fascinating. Here we see that Heinlein, in 1938, had already laid out most of the significant events of what would become his 'Future History', and several stories he would later write were directly mined from this material, including Beyond this Horizon, 'If This Goes On', 'Coventry', and 'The Roads Must Roll'. The story itself, which really only comprises about fifty pages of this work, deals with several items that would become the major subject material for many of his late-life works: the proper role of government versus private actions, economics, religion, what is love and jealousy, and alternative marriage forms. Perry falls in love with Diana, the person who first aided him, and runs afoul of the customs of the day when he takes a swing at one of Diane's former partners. His treatment for this infraction allows Heinlein to present many of his views on society and personal interactions. From this it can be seen that his focus on such material in books like Stranger in a Strange Land, Friday, and I Will Fear No Evil was not an aberration, but rather a continuation of thoughts and feelings he had always had, but couldn't publish during the forties and fifties due to various taboos. This was also probably at least one reason (besides its clumsy technique) why this book could not find a publisher in 1939, as its advocacy of free love and casual nudity would have certainly raised some hackles. As would always be typical of Heinlein's work, he presents some ideas that will challenge your own assumptions of how things should and do work, most especially in this work with his presentation on economics, banking, and taxation. Some additional reading from other sources about these economic ideas is recommended, as I think such reading in conjunction with what is presented here will provide a clearer picture of just how the world works today and how things might be modified for the better. As a novel, this book doesn't work very well, as it is essentially a short story bulked up with all of Heinlein's ideas about the future world. But those ideas scintillate and provide a great perspective from which to view all of his other work. Perhaps it is an irony that his first book should end up being his last published, but I for one am glad that I have had this opportunity to read this and see the genesis of so much that I greatly enjoyed. --- Reviewed by Patrick Shepherd (hyperpat)
Rating:
Summary: Diamond in the Rough
Review: When I joined the Heinlein Society last summer, I sent a letter with my app. stating that I had read every word The Master had written, being my lifetime favorite author; imagine my amazement and thrill when I received an answer from the Society V.P. informing me of the impending publication of this, Heinlein's first novel.
Regrettably, I feel that only a dyed-in-the-wool Heinlein fan, and probably the more conservative of such, would really like this work, as it is more a thinly veiled series of political and social lectures in the guise of a "John Carter of Mars" pseudo-fantasy than a true hard SF story.
On the other hand, one of "Heinlein's Children" will easily recognize many of the character and basic story elements that would appear in later, much more popular works.
As much as I love The Master and all his works, I have to be honest and state that unless one is a fanatic "Heinlein Child" as I am, wait for the paperback edition, or borrow a copy from a friend(my loaner list is already nearly a half dozen fans long!)
Rating:
Summary: Interesting for Heinlein fans tracing the Master's work
Review: When Perry Nelson's car careens over a cliff in 1939, he doesn't expect more than a few seconds of life. Yet he comes to himself in a blizzard, and is helped to safety by a beautiful and talented woman. He soon learns that the year is 2086, and he is in an America which has eliminated poverty, and where each citizen is free to act as he likes, so long as he does no harm to another. He adapts readily to the society, but has difficulty overcoming his 1939 values . . . Written in 1939 and never published, this was Heinlein's first novel. In the model of Edward Bellamy's "Looking Backward", it was unpublished for a good reason--it really isn't that great, and bogs down readily in political and economic discussion. Still, it is worth buying for the Heinlein fan. Why? Not because of its readibility, but because one can trace so many concepts Heinlein would later develop so brilliantly. The "may I do you a service" society of "Methuselah's Children"--the "roads" of "The Roads Must Roll"--even the roots of the story of "The Man Too Lazy to Fail" from "Time Enough for Love"--all may be found here. Nehemiah Scudder is described. You never know when you will meet the seed of something Heinlein would later use. A character makes an economic statement--and you remember that Dr. Chan, in "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" said almost the same thing. You get a slice of the early Heinlein, as he morphed from naval officer (not coincidentally, Perry's 1939 job) to SF master. Recommended for the Heinlein fan, but not for someone seeking their first taste of the Master.
| 
