<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: How not to study an author
Review: Alexei Panshin started off on the wrong foot with this book: he read some of Mr. Heinlein's mail without first getting Heinlein's permission. This in turn led Heinlein to refuse to cooperate with him, or even speak with him when they met at a public event (Heinlein said: "You have read my mail. GOOD DAY, SIR!" and he turned his back on him). Panshin demonstrates at length in this book that he doesn't like Heinlein, doesn't approve of his ideas, doesn't understand him, and thinks that Heinlein isn't a very good writer. How much of this opinion is personal animus, how much left-wing disapproval of a right-winger, and how much plain stupidity I wouldn't venture to guess, but to paraphrase the author of a review below, entitled "Panshin in Dimension" , it contributes very little of value to the study of Heinlein or his work. I realize it is hard to be objective and insightful about someone you don't like, and it does have the occasional interesting insight into Heinlein's fiction, but mostly, it stinks. Not recommended, unless you read it first at the library and decide you want it.
Rating: 
Summary: A Place to Start
Review: For anyone looking for background or critical information on Heinlein and his works, this book is a good place to start. It is well written, informative, interesting, and also attempts to explain what is meant by "Science Fiction." Panshin also reveals his views on what a story should consist of. However, as a work of criticism, the book is very flawed. Panshin often makes assertions that cannot be backed up by fact, and his anyalysis is many times far to narrow to be taken seriously. If nothing else, Panshin's book is a good place to find key issues of contention that are often brought up by Heinlein critics. It is not, however, a place to find praise of Heinlein as an author or final answers to any questions regarding his works. Heinlein himself claimed that he never read the book nor met Alexei Panshin.
Rating:
Summary: A Place to Start
Review: For anyone looking for background or critical information on Heinlein and his works, this book is a good place to start. It is well written, informative, interesting, and also attempts to explain what is meant by "Science Fiction." Panshin also reveals his views on what a story should consist of. However, as a work of criticism, the book is very flawed. Panshin often makes assertions that cannot be backed up by fact, and his anyalysis is many times far to narrow to be taken seriously. If nothing else, Panshin's book is a good place to find key issues of contention that are often brought up by Heinlein critics. It is not, however, a place to find praise of Heinlein as an author or final answers to any questions regarding his works. Heinlein himself claimed that he never read the book nor met Alexei Panshin.
Rating:
Summary: The good, the bad, and .. you decide
Review: I waited a long time before deciding to to buy and read this book. Heinlein was the author of the first SF I ever read; I didn't read anything by Panshin until twenty years later. However, I like them both, in different ways and for different reasons. While I cannot say I agree with all of the observations, criticisms, and conclusions Panshin has made about Heinlein -- I don't -- "Heinlein in Dimension" *did* make me think a bit more about the Heinlein I've read. Seeing how Panshin viewed him and his work has made me consider my own opinions on the matter. If you're looking for an RAH cheerleading book, this isn't it. If you're looking for a completely objective and unbiased book about Heinlein and his work, I don't think this is it either. If, however, you're familiar with Heinlein (even a fan), are looking for someone *trying* to be objective about the subject, and can read it with the continual remembrance that you're reading someone's *opinion*, then you might find "Heinlein in Dimension" worthwhile -- in viewpoint-stretching ways if not as pure analysis.
Rating:
Summary: The good, the bad, and .. you decide
Review: I waited a long time before deciding to to buy and read this book. Heinlein was the author of the first SF I ever read; I didn't read anything by Panshin until twenty years later. However, I like them both, in different ways and for different reasons. While I cannot say I agree with all of the observations, criticisms, and conclusions Panshin has made about Heinlein -- I don't -- "Heinlein in Dimension" *did* make me think a bit more about the Heinlein I've read. Seeing how Panshin viewed him and his work has made me consider my own opinions on the matter. If you're looking for an RAH cheerleading book, this isn't it. If you're looking for a completely objective and unbiased book about Heinlein and his work, I don't think this is it either. If, however, you're familiar with Heinlein (even a fan), are looking for someone *trying* to be objective about the subject, and can read it with the continual remembrance that you're reading someone's *opinion*, then you might find "Heinlein in Dimension" worthwhile -- in viewpoint-stretching ways if not as pure analysis.
Rating: 
Summary: A critique of Heinlein's philosophy more than his writing
Review: Panshin seems to have many philosophical disagreements with Heinlein, and thus has a few axes to grind. This seriously distracts from his criticism of Heinlein's writing. The criticism mostly serves as a vehicle for making cracks about Heinlein's philosophy instead. Much criticism of Heinlein seems to fall into one of two camps - the bash him at all costs camp, and the adoring fans camp. (This one is obviously from the bashing camp.) Neither really does the man justice. He's a great writer, but not without flaws.
Rating:
Summary: Very poor understanding of subject material
Review: This book is best viewed as a source of questions which should be answered rather than a critical analysis of Heinlein. Panshin will, in one chapter, praise Heinlein for the economy of his descriptive prose, while in another chapter criticise him for the dearth of descriptive prose. Panshin introduces very worthwhile topics for analysis of Heinlein (such as Heinlein's extended character dialogues); unfortunately Panshin does not seem capable of addressing the topics he raises. The best review of this book of which I am aware is "Rah, Rah, R.A.H." by Spider Robinson, reprinted in "Requiem: New Colleccted Works by Robert A. Heinlein and Tributes to the Grand Master." I urge all Heinlein fans to read this book, but I don't expect that anyone will derive significant enlightenment from it
Rating:
Summary: Panshin in Dimension
Review: This book is for Alexei Panshin fans, not Robert Heinlein fans or critics. Panshin may have lived for a time on the same planet as Robert Heinlein, and may even have a few inside biographical facts to share, but he is culturally, philosophically and intellectually unprepared to approach, much less master, his subject. I was first exposed to this book in high school, and felt at the time that it was deeply flawed as criticism, but was unable to fully articulate my concerns and misgivings. After completing my degree in literature, I rediscovered the book and found it far less sound as literary criticism than the average Sunday section book review. This book is Panshin's personal response to Heinlein rather than a formal literary criticism or other form of scholarship. He speaks directly to approximately half of Heinlein's opus to that point, at length about half a dozen books, shows no understanding of the author's philosophies, merits, or demerits, provides no character studies, explores no recurring motifs, no application of style and diction, and contributes nothing of value to the study of Heinlein, science fiction, or literature. On the other hand, fans of Panshin's somewhat interesting novels are provided an opportunity to examine another voice of the author and perhaps gain some additional insights into his own philosophy and psychology.
Rating:
Summary: Panshin isn't fit to lick Heinlein's boots
Review: This book pretends to be objective about Heinlein, but I suspect that this is mostly a technique to try to draw Heinlein's fans away from him. RAH's most important works, such as _Stranger in a Strange Land_, _Starship Troopers_, or "Gulf," are invariably trashed by Panshin. To give one really glaring example of Panshin's bias, when the hero of _Glory Road_ states that he dislikes Vietnamese women because they are small, Panshin takes this as bigotry. Panshin himself notes that the hero here is markedly different from the hero of _The Door Into Summer_, who goes back in time to tell a young girl to meet him in the future and marry him. Somehow, he fails to make the connection--Heinlein, contrary to what Panshin and other critics say, IS capable of creating DIFFERENT characters whose life views do NOT necessarily represent his own. And of course, Panshin's review of "Gulf" is one of the worst examples of literary criticism I have ever seen.
<< 1 >>
|
