★★★★★ 5
Great story!
Format: Mass Market Paperback
I read this book as a teenager, in the 1960s, and just, now, finished rereading it, at age 65. I see that I missed many of the author's ideas (due to my youthful lusts, antics, and ignorance of life and of the Bible). "Stranger in a Strange Land" struggles with boundaries of self, morality, and what may constitute/govern a normal healthy society. The author pokes at our spiritual needs, ideas, or rituals upon which we all depend to order our lives, whether we be atheistic, pantheistic, or monotheistic. By minimizing God and godhood to the level of individual understanding and growth, the Heinlein's story posits that all philosophical views need not be antagonistic toward one another; that, by default, truth is and should be relative, given our potentially reformed natural self-interests. Whether a `religious' or irreligious person or organization is primitive, civilized, or `who-cares', Heinlein poses that, despite our ideologies that distinguish us from others, or unite us, only a growing constructive self-awareness is really important, not whether God really exists or whether we will face a final judgment. The author's trick to redemption is how we decide to get along with ourselves and our neighbors, within a `fly right, or mess up and go back to the beginning' scenario, in contrast to the biblical one-life-one-chance view. By design or default, in this story, Heinlein relegates God below human self-actualization, and allows no room for absolute truth. Heinlein's self-fulfilling self-actualization is entirely at odds with biblical Christianity and biblical Judaism, yet quite at home with most religions and faiths that rely on salvation by personal works, and reincarnation-based religions. Maybe that was part of the author's point in telling the story.
When it comes to putting a halt to abusive powers, I have to chuckle at how Heinlein has Smith frustrate the overbearing powers-that-be. A thought struck me about twenty years ago that those who have power or understanding have a God-given responsibility to exercise discipline and restraint with those who lack power or understanding. Having more power or understanding than someone or something else does not obviate one's responsibility to exercise that power or understanding to better the world in which we live, nor does it entitle one to do ought but to treat others with love, respect, and decency, which, for the betterment of society and our world, may require that one's power or understanding be exercised to identify or destroy evil. Though this philosophy is exercised by the lead character within the story, the clarity of this comes late to Valentine Michael Smith, yet, sadly, such clarity does not move him to embrace an absolute God, absolute truth, nor his own existence as a created being that is not God, leaving Heinlein's view of life and after-life harshly in contrast to the biblical viewpoint, hence at odds with God. Martian or human, in the end, Heinlein simply does a shell game with his characters, when the issue of death arises, leaving readers to guess in what level the author will eventually hide them, to avoid a final judgment, leaving each soul's story to continue ad infinitum, ad nauseam, without any ultimate accountability.
This is an entertaining science fiction story, yet, Heinlein's ideas, in this sexual-religious-social romp, border on theological sophistry. His ideas will probably offend most established points of view. Despite his general bravado, and so bold a topic, Heinlein omits balanced discussion among the characters, fails to deal with any absolute truth or true final judgment of evil, and perfunctorily dismisses biblical views that might be germane to cogent biblical discussion. There are two upwelling truths that the author has twisted and cheapened them considerably, by his denial of absolute truth and avoiding our accountability to God's perfect righteousness. Those are self-sacrificing love and the inevitability that every soul is responsible for her/his own thoughts and actions. Though he allows watered down versions of those traditional moral elements to remain, Heinlein (who must have seen too many money-hungry medicine shows, tent meetings, and carnival acts) relies solely on human constructive self-awareness, self-discipline, and self-empowerment to pose a stab at a positive future for humanity and the afterlife. The story's quasi-moral might read, "Find any way to beat the present system and exploit it at almost any cost, so long as no one really gets hurt." Smith's earthly end-game of self-sacrifice is a corrupted shadow of Christ's. Smith's is a twisted image of self-sacrifice, a huckster's trick to work the crowd, avoiding entirely the biblical God and plan of Christ. Heinlein's bootstrap theology, in the end, can neither respect nor agree upon one God, nor save itself from its own moral meanderings and wishful unthinking of human sin.
As an author, myself, I would add that every one of our actions, gestures, and our written or spoken utterances, has its consequences, and that we are ultimately responsible, to God, for everything that we generate and utter. I believe that Heinlein's story agrees partly with my belief, except that Heinlein leaves the one true God completely out of his story. Despite Heinlein's philosophical thrust that everyone can claim "Thou art God", for self or others, I personally subscribe to the biblical view that all things and people are created by God, and that He holds us together by His Laws and will, and that there is, yet, a separation that He reserves between us and Him, that can only be bridged or reconciled through His Christ, and, furthermore, that we are the only part of His Creation that has been offered that exclusive plan of redemption. By contrast, Heinlein's story offers the carrot of constructive self-awareness as the means of possible redemption for humanity, insecurely hoping to save us from ourselves.
Craig M. Szwed
(Author, photographer, combat veteran, father, composer)
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2013
