Chefelf's review of... the cat who (might) walk through walls
#1
Posted 14 March 2005 - 06:41 AM
What time period are they in? Why do they have enough money to rent a space ship but not an appartment? Why is the author making such an effort to make us think that he believes rape and such things are wrong when clearly he's a sex maniac? What does the first part of the story have to do with the last part? Are any events in this book at all related? Couldn't you just read the end and be left with the same sense of general confusion you'd get from reading the whole thing? I think the best way to sum it up is with these classified adds I made for the characters.
Gwen-Hazel: Great great grandmother seeks stubborn arrogant male for night time computer screen romance.
Turn ons: dead guys and pancakes.
Turn offs: Free lunches
My ideal mate must enjoy writing at computer, solving (or not solving) mysteries, sexual innuendo, enslaving random guys in my appartment, foot grafting and not killing kittens.
Prefered Pets: A banzai tree named Tree-san.
Richard Ames: Doctor of something seeks hundreds of years older woman for rubbing cheese in heating ducts.
likes: Brontosaurus steak.
dislikes: Waffles
My girl has to enjoy freeing the moon, writing childrens books, having psychic links with computers, and bringing forth offspring who will seduce me.
Prefered pets: A kitten named Pixel who dosnt know that walking through walls is impossible.
If you wish to know more about these two swingin singles click this link.
Chefelf's review
Quote
#2
Posted 14 March 2005 - 09:57 AM
Let's see if I can't clear a few things up...
A better question would be: What time period AREN'T they in? THey bounce around a lot but the book starts out circa 2155 or so (I think).
Maybe I was unclear. They are on the run from the moderator of this space station that they live on because Richard is framed for a murder he didn't commit. So they are fleeing rather than just kinda joyriding.
That's a difficult one. The author DOES think rape is wrong but he just has some very, very unorthodox views on sex. He has created characters in this book (and many others) that are extremely open on sex to the point that wild orgies can take place and include mother-father, daughter-father, son-mother, brother-sister sexual experiences. The strange thing is that Heinlein is SO open about it that, as the reader, it doesn't seem nearly as creepy as it probably sounds now. I remember someone describing Heinlein's sexual ideas to me (before I'd read any of his books) and thinking that it sounded pretty disgusting. Somehow he makes it work in his writing.
It's still pretty freaky though.
Nothing at all. That's probably the book's largest problem. There is no real plot at all and the events of the beginning don't effect the events that follow or the ending of the book at all.
Barely.
I think so. I can't see why not. Book One and Book Two don't seem to have any sort of relationship to Book Three. The only thing they do is build the characters of Richard and Gwen.
I think you did a pretty good job with the character classifieds. Except I think Richard likes waffles.
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
#3
Posted 14 March 2005 - 12:37 PM
Less Is More v4
Now resigned to a readership of me, my cat and some fish
#4
Posted 14 March 2005 - 05:02 PM
Hmmm, well those answers do make me a little less confused. As for book one and two developing the characters they only seem to get more confusing, the fact that Gwen is immortal for example. Perhaps the author figured this would make her more interesting in some way. It didn't.
She's still just a piece of luggage for the hero to drag around for no apparent reason, just like Bill and Tree San, who at the moment is my favorite character from the book. As for the other characters it seems they're being introduced very much like the characters in the Starwars prequels. "Things appear to be going just fine for Jedi knight Richard Ames, but wait! Here comes the fiendish Lazarus Long and a Rabbi with no legs! What could happen now???"
As for the cat problem I really get the impression that it was supposed to be a metaphor at first, but then the author just decided that he didnt have time to draw such a comparison and so he threw in a cat and told the reader it could walk through walls. That would explain the fact that the cat (I actually got the impression that it was a kitten and not a cat) that the kitten never really does anything at all having to do with anything. Regardless, it really is unforgiveable that the author could not devote one page to writing about this cat/kitten actually walking through walls.
But what's this at the end of your post? Ah, finally, something to debate. I can really picture literary scholars arguing over whether the main character did or did not like waffles and the moral implications of his breakfast choices. For my part I am on the side that says he dislikes waffles. He CLEARLY asks for brontosaurus steak, even though in a later chapter dinosaur meat is said to be dtought and tasteless, I think that it could still be considered as being better than waffles.
It's sad that the most interesting debate spawned by this book is about waffles.
By the way, I would suggest that you rate this book for Loathesomness of Hero, Boobs, Mentions of rape and guys kicked in the crotch, but then I realized that there was no villain to have joie de vivre.
This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 14 March 2005 - 05:30 PM
Quote
#5
Posted 15 March 2005 - 08:41 AM
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
#6
Posted 15 March 2005 - 09:03 AM
edit: And he clearly likes waffles. Who doesn't like waffles?
This post has been edited by SimeSublime: 15 March 2005 - 09:03 AM
JM's official press secretary, scientific advisor, diplomat and apparent antagonist?
#7
Posted 15 March 2005 - 09:43 AM
Several unsuccessful movies have been made based on his books: Starship Troopers, The Puppet Masters, "The Red Planet", to name a few (i.e. all).
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
#8
Posted 15 March 2005 - 11:00 PM
Oh, and I read Starship Troopers. There's a lot in that book about how corporal punishment is great. Don't remember the plot, though.
This post has been edited by Laura: 15 March 2005 - 11:01 PM
#9
Posted 16 March 2005 - 01:23 AM
Quote
#10
Posted 16 March 2005 - 10:05 AM
Oh, and I read Starship Troopers. There's a lot in that book about how corporal punishment is great. Don't remember the plot, though.
There is ALWAYS a part where there's a girl/guy who is really old but appears really young. He's obsessed with rejuvination and people living forever. I can't say I blame him... it's a good thing to fantasize about.
And there is almost always a part with creepy/inappropriate sexual conduct. Somehow, though, he always seems to make it work. There is a scene in To Sail Beyond the Sunset where he pushes it a little too far. The main character finds her two children in bed having sex (brother and sister) and she crawls into bed with them, naked. Then she embraces them and talks with them and they're all naked in bed together. Even though no sex takes places, that part kinda freaked me out.
Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video
Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
#11
Posted 22 March 2005 - 08:22 PM
#13
Posted 23 March 2005 - 04:32 AM
"And then Lestat did some very naughty things to the nun and so she killed herself. Lestat felt very bad about doing naughty things to the nun so he decided he would kill himself too. Lestat went out to the dessert and it was very dark until the sun came up. "Hello!" said the sun. "Hello!" said Lestat. Then Lestat felt very bad, because the sun was cooking his flesh! The moral of the story is don't do naughty things with nuns!"
Quote
#14
Posted 23 March 2005 - 08:14 AM
Anyway, by "kids books" I don't mean, like, picture books. They were chapter books aimed at, you know, 12-15-year-olds. YA, dude. YA.
This post has been edited by Laura: 23 March 2005 - 08:15 AM
#15
Posted 23 March 2005 - 07:19 PM
Quote