Rating: 
Summary: Truly a work of art on post armageddon survival.
Review: I have been reading RAH's works since 1961. I was about nine years old when I picked up "Starship Troopers" at the library. Little did I know that this man would become a central figure in my literary world for years to come. From then on I was hooked on his books. When I had read all of the Heinlein books at the library, I began to prowl the local used paperback book stores looking for his SF treasures. I even rode a bus for two hours once to another city because one store had a copy of "Methuselah's Children". I was eleven then. My old man had a field day on my rear end when he found out about that one. It was worth it. Anyway, "Farnhams Freehold" is an excellent example of what a true survivor must do, whether they like it or not, to get by. I liked the book as a child because it was an adventure! I liked it as I grew older because of Hugh's tough no nonsense attitude when it came to everyone's well being. Hugh was smart eno! ugh to knuckle under while he was a slave so he could gain the trust of his captors. In todays world that is called sucking up. He had his reasons though and used this ploy to his, the twins and Barbara's advantage. I would recommend this book to anyone who isn't thin skinned and a whiner.
Rating: 
Summary: 4.9 Stars
Review: I recently read Heinlein's Stranger In A Strange Land, liked it, and decided to read some more of RAH's works. So I went to the bookstore looking for The Number of the Beast, the Heinlein I had decided to read. I didn't see it on the shelf, but I did see a book called Farnham's Freehold. As I had never heard of this book before, I took it off and looked at it. The strange cover (as if the title wasn't strange enough) intrigued me, as did the subheading "Science fiction's most controversial novel". Hmmm... Then I read the summary on the back of the book and decided to buy it. And then I read it.What can I say? I liked the book. But it's not for everyone. It is very light science fiction (but then so are most (all?) of Heinlein's), but the overall story itself is complex. It shows a future world where blacks are the predominant race, and whites are slaves. Lots of other things too; cannibalism, free love (Heinlein for you), racial slurs, and constant reference to women as "sluts". Etc., etc., etc. However, all this is in here for are reason. This book is more satire, than sci-fi. It is a bit like 1984 or Brave New World at times, like other Heinlein works at others, but in the end, definately in a class of it's own. Don't go into this book expecting to read another Strange In A Strange Land, or Starship Troopers. It's not. It's different. Not something for everyone, but possibly everything for someone.
Rating:
Summary: wonderful
Review: this is the first time i read this this author but really enjoyed this book. i think some people have reviewed this book badly because of the roles being reversed. its just narrow minded reviewers. keep on writing heinlein you have a fan for life...
Rating: 
Summary: Unlikeable protagonist and blatant soapboxing
Review: I'm a big fan of Heinlein in general -- both pre- and post- "Stranger in a Strange Land". I've read nearly all of his novels, and enjoyed them all -- except for this one. I had a problem with how unlikeable the "hero" was and how unrealistic his interactions with the other characters were. Usually I like character motivation and behavior to flow with the plot more realistically, even in fantastic situations like science fiction novels. That didn't really happen for me with this book, though. The "hero" seemed to be there more as a mouthpiece for a political philosophy, and that kind of soapboxing by an author often overshadows the story itself. It certainly did in this case for me. I wouldn't recommend this as your first Heinlein novel.
Rating:
Summary: Heinlein on race relations . . . or not
Review: Is this science-fiction's most contraversial novel? I'm not sure if I could call it that, there's plenty here to raise eyebrows but I can probably think of three or four SF books that exacted the "contraversial" feeling from me more than this book. It's typical Heinlein and if you just left it at that, longtime Heinlein fans would probably know exactly what I was talking about. For those not so blessed, let me explain then. Heinlein generally takes an idea that's a little on the edgy side (here blacks taking over the world after the whites wipe themselves out) and runs with it, having his characters functioning as little more than mouthpieces arguing his points over and over. If you're into it, you'll forget the lack of extensive plotting and delve into the idea . . . if not then you've got a hard road in front of you. Farnham and his family take cover in a fallout shelter to avoid a nuclear war . . . the resulting war somehow propels them two thousand years into the future where the Chosen race (guess who?) has taken over and all light skinned folks are used as slaves (among other things, but you'll discover that when you read the book) . . . Farnham gets dropped into this and being the practical self made man that he is, adapts himself while thinking of ways to get out, while Joseph, a young black man who worked for him, sees little problem is taking advantage of the situation, while remaining essentially decent (sort of a "shoe is on the other foot thing" but Heinlein wisely stays away from too much of that line of thinking). They are about the most well rounded characters, though Farnham is a typical Heinlein protagonist, always thinking, uses his wits, an unshakeable core of his own morality, stuff like that. Joseph is much the same way. The women fall into two catagories, either simpering useless wimps (Grace) or mindnumbingly devoted sex kittens, smart and loyal. Right. Some of the stuff shown here will definitely make you wonder how much he believed in and how much was pure shock value (and it wouldn't be a Heinlein book without a discussion on sex, this time revolving around incest, but I'll let you discover that one for yourself) but overall it's a swift tale that contains a bunch of ideas that are worth thinking over, mostly how slavery is bad no matter who does it, among other things. Gear yourself up for it before you read it, because he's not going to make it easy, keep your head above water and you'll make it through, it is a strong novel and not one of his absolute best but maybe strong enough to make the second tier of greats.
Rating: 
Summary: Ick
Review: I'm giving this one three stars just because there are some interesting speculations in it about the future of a postapocalyptic world. But this one ranks near the bottom of my own list of Heinlein's novels. For one thing, he wrote this one smack in the middle of his Nuclear Rant Period, and he's very heavily into Soapbox Mode here. This was a time in Heinlein's life when he got (let's put it gently) deeply annoyed at anyone who suggested that massive nuclear buildup wasn't the way to handle the alleged Soviet threat, or that maybe surviving a nuclear holocaust might not be such a terrific thing. (Indeed, he built a bomb shelter at his Colorado Springs home -- _before_ Colorado Springs was anywhere near a likely nuclear target; NORAD didn't exist yet.) His surly attitude (not to mention his tub-thumping sermons about the Benefits of Military Service) informs this entire novel. For another -- and it's probably a consequence of the first problem -- _not one_ of the characters in this book is even remotely likeable. Joseph, the 'houseboy', is as close as we come to a decent human being, and even _he_ turns out to be sinister and menacing before we're through. It's hard to take sides between Hugh Farnham and his son Duke; the dad's a jerk and the son's a whiny wuss. Hugh's wife Grace is no prize either, and their daughter Karen -- apparently intended to be sweet and innocent -- just comes across as spoiled. And Barbara never gels as a character at all. For a third thing, even the stuff some readers _like_ about late-period Heinlein isn't well done here. For example, some readers have commented on Heinlein's apparent approval of incest. That shouldn't be news; _all_ of Heinlein's works stand in part for the proposition that moral standards are relative to time and place, and there's quite a bit of (authorially approved) incest in his later works. Nevertheless, _here_ it just doesn't work: in the context of _this_ family (hardly one of Heinlein's freewheeling horny-redheaded-genius open marriages), Karen's remarks to Hugh on the subject just sound out-of-place and weird. This one belongs next to _Expanded Universe_ on the shelf of books that could well have turned me off to Heinlein if I'd started with them. It's not without merit -- again, there's some interesting social commentary and speculative future history -- but for my tastes the merits are far outweighed by the flaws.
Rating:
Summary: Not Heinlein's best.
Review: This book was a quick paced, fast read, but not Heinlein's best. The main characters aren't particularly likeable. Hugh Farnham is an arrogant, bellicose bully, his wife is a middle aged idle lush, son Duke is an equally arrogant, racist mama's boy, and little Karen wants to make Daddy her partner for procreation. Barbara is somewhat likeable, although she comes off a bit trampy, and the houseboy Joseph is about the most decent guy in the household/fallout shelter. The basic plot of the book is that nuclear war between the USA/USSR destroys most of the population in the Northern Hemisphere. Over generations, the darker skinned races of Africa and South Asia gain power, creating a matrilineal society where whites and lighter skinned races are slaves. RAH made some keen observations in this book, the one I liked was a reference to black peasants and small farmers known as "poor black trash". Just as "poor white trash" were in economic competition with slaves and black freedmen in the antebellum/Jim Crow South, so poor black farmers compete economically with white slaves in this future. This book was written in the 1960s, at the height of the Cold War. Reading books such as this and "Tramp Royale", it becomes clear that Heinlein was always a man of his time. This was an enjoyable book, would have liked it better if the main characters weren't as repugnant.
Rating:
Summary: Very uneven
Review: This is not one of Heinlein's best efforts. Actually, it's one
of his worst. At first I thought it was terrible, but after I finished it I found there were some interesting plot twists and
some trenchant observations. There are some very strange things in this book--the "heroes" at the beginning mix booze, Seconal and Miltown. Heinlein doesn't even blink in writing it. In fact, he appears quite enthusiatic. There are some other strange things--a discussion of incest that almost sounds approving. At first I suspected that Heinlein had been the one mixing the drugs when he wrote this book. And the other things--cannibalism, for one. If this had been the first book of
Heinlein's that I had ever read, I would have thought he verged
on being nuts. Fortunately, I've read his best work, so I can
forgive this novel. Which, unfortunately, at times, verges
on being a monstrosity. Try _The Door Into Summer_ or _Double Star_
before you read this. Otherwise, your opinion of Heinlein
might be permanently warped.
Rating:
Summary: Not his best
Review: This and Glory Road were the last two Heinlein novels I really liked. Afterwards Heinlein changed his style and many would agree not for the better. One problem with this book is that it does not flow as well as his earlier works partly because Heinlein takes up too many pages with thinly disguised preaching about society and how it should be run. Bear in mind that Heinlein was essentially of the Campbell school of thought about science fiction: take an idea and derive its logical conclusions and consequences and present them in story form. But no matter how one tries, when the subject is about economics, society, and people rather than about physics, chemistry, and engineering, personal opinion and bias is bound to creep in. The bias in this book shows very clearly that Heinlein, although progressive in some areas of thought, was definitely a prisoner of his time in others.
Rating:
Summary: Stranger in a strange old man
Review: Here we get a Heinlein entering his senior era and lusting through the pages of his novels for sexy young nymphets, dreams of being caught in a post-ww3 bunker beneath his home and shuffled to the future. I'm kind of vague on the plot cuz i read it so many years ago, but this and Door into Summer are the Heinlein books I remember best. This one's not as proselytizing as "Stranger", and made me a laugh a lot more. Heinlein always left me with the impression that he was right, even if he was insane. But apparently he had some kind of fun before the 80s killed him.
|
