That was my reaction to this piece by Nisi Shawl, who "reviews science fiction for The Seattle Times".
Her piece begins with this paragraph:
The face of fantastic fiction is changing. More than just its face: This former locus of racial and cultural stereotypes, where Robert Heinlein's spaceship pilots look, sound and act like 1950s Pat Boone fans and J.R.R. Tolkien's doughty elves battle hordes of Asiatic Orcs, is undergoing a transformation that's more than skin deep. Three recent novels demonstrate the genre's growing ability to represent human diversity.
That made me wonder if she had ever read Heinlein's 1954 juvenile, The Star Beast, where one of the principal characters is from Kenya. Heinlein introduces him as follows:
Back on Earth at Federation Capital His Excellency the Right Honorable Henry Gladstone Kiku, M. A. (Oxon) Litt D. honoris causa (Capetown), O. B. E., Permanent Under Secretary for Spatial Affairs, was not worried about the doomed crustaceans because he would never know of them.
Secretary Kiku, Heinlein tells us, is responsible for "[a]nything and everything outside the Earth's ionosphere" — in an age when humanity has explored hundreds of other star systems.
Or whether Shawl had ever read Heinlein's 1955 juvenile, Tunnel in the Sky, where one of the principal characters is Caroline Mshiyeni. Heinlein introduces her by giving us the thoughts of the protagonist, Rod Walker, who is thinking about possible partners for a survival test:
That big Zulu girl, Caroline something-unpronounceable. Strong as an ox and absolutely fearless.
Or whether Shawl had ever read Starship Troopers, first published in 1959. (It may now be his best known novel, thanks to that terrible movie.) The hero is Juan Rico, a Filipino. (Incidentally, the spaceship pilots in Starship Troopers are usually women. The first pilot we meet is Yvette Deladrier, who brilliantly rescues a group of troopers. The second is Carmencita Ibañez.)
For sure Shawl didn't bother to read the Wikipedia article on Heinlein, which discusses Heinlein and race in great detail. And even told me something about the hero of Tunnel in the Sky, which I had missed, though I have read the book a number of times.
You probably can find science fiction authors who fit Shawl's stereotype — but Heinlein isn't one of them.
Let me end with a small suggestion for Ms. Shawl: Why not read a little Heinlein? You might like him. And you certainly would learn something.
Cross posted at Jim MIller on Politics.
Posted by Jim Miller at November 03, 2007 12:42 PM | Email ThisHeinlein's conservative ideas are well documented and (un)progressive types stop there and assume since he's conservative he must be racist - or at least whitebread.
They got some of this blown back in their faces with the relative success of the last film made of his work, Starship Troopers. Paul Verhoeven, the director, actually went way beyond conservative in portraying a fascist-like society (at least with respect to costumes), but the public loved it. He was very disappointed.
When Spock asks how this could be he explains, "I am black on my right side, and he is white on his right side."
Let That Be Your Last Battlefield
And that's not even talking about "The Bridge" with an African-American woman, a Russian, Chinese (who later became openly gay) and a Vulcan.
http://www.adherents.com/lit/startrek.html
The other thing this liberal journalist would learn by actually reading Heinlein is to be less willing to grant excessive power to government... Heinlein is a libertarian hero, who would never have bought in to liberal notions of the nanny state or high rates of taxation...
Heinlein's notions of "chain marriages" and female leaders put him firmly out of the socially conservative realm of his time. This might appeal to Nisi Shawl. But Heinlein's notions of limited government (nearly to the point of anarchism) and respect for free markets would alienate him from the modern liberal camp.
No, the best way to describe Heinlein is libertarian, which is why he is among my favorite writers, along with Ayn Rand!
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 3, 2007 02:20 PMI have read Tolkien as well.
Jim wrote to me about this subject. I replied. Perhaps, Jim, you would be gracious enough to post my response, as you took the time to solicit it from me. You would do your readers a favor by not omitting the article I referred to.
If anyone reads the column I've written, they will see that in my opinion addressing race adequately involves more than darkening characters skin or giving them names drawn from non-European cultures.
Posted by: Nisi Shawl on November 3, 2007 03:43 PMSeems to me that you have a little problem with bias yourself.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on November 3, 2007 04:09 PMEven Sci-Fi?
Maybe next we can discuss the lack of racial diversity in Harry Potter. Or "Charlie Brown's Christmas". Or J.P. Patches.
Posted by: Shaun on November 3, 2007 04:13 PMDo you wonder like I do Bruce that perhaps liberal tolerence is nothing more than a myth?
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on November 3, 2007 04:44 PM
What does that mean? In leftist terminology it means that stone age cultures that never invented the wheel are no different than a culture that invented indoor plumbing and the electric light. Where's my barf bag.
Oh and I thought Rico was argentinian not filopino.
Posted by: Travis Pahl on November 3, 2007 06:03 PMI don't think any single label really captures his thinking even late in life, though "libertarian" is closest. (FWIW, I am far more impressed by Heinlein as a science fiction writer than I am by him as a political philosopher.)
We know Rico is a Filipino because his native language is Tagalog.
Posted by: Jim Miller on November 3, 2007 06:25 PMMuch of his fascination with overseas cultures came from a round-the-world cruise he took with his wife, in which he visited countries in the southern hemisphere. He wrote a book about it, Tramp Royale I think. Only non-fiction I can remember reading of his. (Or, you know, mostly non-fiction, him being an author and all.)
Beyond my understanding is her world view of victimism while living in a country where the world is everyone's oyster.
Has this woman ever worked hard in spite of personal hardships like my wife and I and most of the commenters here have? I doubt it very much.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on November 3, 2007 07:49 PMAnd today, in the longest consecutive match-ups in college football, after 44 years and one day, Navy beat Notre Dame in football, at ND.
Go Navy, Beat Army!
Posted by: Obi-Wan on November 3, 2007 10:02 PMThe left particularly hates anyone who used to be on the left but has grown up. Although I'm pretty sure most on the left do not know the true definition of a neo-con, which is a former leftist who has embraced conservatism, they reserve their most potent vitriol for them.
I believe this is where the hatred for Heinlein comes from. He is a traitor to their sacred cause and therefore deserves condemnation without consideration of either the man or his actual works.
Posted by: deadwood on November 3, 2007 10:03 PMI think my favorite Heinlein novel is "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress." Is that early or late? Libertarian or Conservative? It was a lot of fun, whatever you call it.
I don't think Heinlein was at his best depicting racial issues. Historic science fiction, for the most part, just wasn't. Ray Bradbury's another writer who tried, in different ways than Heinlein. Another "almost winner," as they used to call them on the Bozo the Clown show.
I take exception to having my opinions labeled as "biases." I also take exception to a lot of posters' assumptions as to my work history, reading habits, etc. Perhaps your assumptions make you feel safer, somehow. They have no basis in reality, however, as you would know if you cared to ask me about them.
The article I referred to above, btw, and the one I mentioned to Jim in my response to his email message (a response that for some reason he neglected even to summarize, let alone quote, in his original post here) is by Chan Davis, and concerns race and representation in earlier SF. It's available online, at . It was written in 1949, so obviously we in sfdom have been thinking about these sorts of things for a long, long time.
I like thinking. I like talking. Let's do some more.
Posted by: Nisi Shawl on November 3, 2007 11:52 PMFor the record, I do not recall ever sending her an email. I searched my "Sent" folder, which goes back to early this year, and found no messages to her.
Perhaps she has me confused with someone else? I do have a common name.
Posted by: Jim Miller on November 4, 2007 07:13 AMMaybe Nisi needs to move her desk away from Lornett Turnbull's.
Posted by: Organization Man on November 4, 2007 07:25 AMThe Moon is a Harsh Mistress is perhaps his most libertarian novel. It is often considered one of the most libertarian influencing novels out there (even outside of heinlein).
I think were alot of the left grew to like Heinlein was his very free loving oriented book 'Stranger in a Strange Land' but I would also argue that it was very libertarian in its message. It emphasized the part of libertarianism that modern liberals think they have a monopoly on.
Posted by: Travis on November 4, 2007 08:10 AMCould you recommend some SF where people of less than average hight are not referred to as doughty, elves or warmongers? While there may be great stride made in SF being more racially diverse the hight challenged are still subject to hurtful stereotypes. Your casual use of the world elf is no less offensive than the n word.
Posted by: Lambo on November 4, 2007 09:08 AMThe burden of his message was quite similar to your post, which helped my confusion. Absent Shawn's permission to post his email here, I'm going to refrain from doing so. But here's my response, in case anyone's interested:
"Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Shawn. I really appreciate you getting in touch with me.
There is a fascinating account of earlier attempts to depict realistic racial diversity online somewhere online....It's by Chan Davis, and the title is "Critique and Proposals." Written in 1949. Perhaps you're familiar with it? We reference it in the book I cowrote on the subject, "Writing the Other."
Of course race and representation are much deeper, much more complex issues than skin color and naming conventions, as I point out toward the end of that essay. I do think these issues are getting more attention in recent years, and are benefiting from more work, and more representation by writers of color.
If you'd like to talk about this subject in greater depth than a book review allows, and with other fen, you might want to look into joining the Carl Brandon Society's list serve, where that's one of the primary topics. The website is .
Thanks again for your message. Nisi Shawl"
Again, I am so sorry that I mistakenly thought that exchange happened with you, Jim. Nisi
Posted by: Nisi Shawl on November 4, 2007 09:39 AM"Doughty" also for me has no relation as a word to height. It conveys the impression of a dogged fighter, determined, fierce, and persistent. It's not code for short.
Hope that helps.
Posted by: Nisi Shawl on November 4, 2007 09:50 AMYes, it's just a book review, but it is an opinion piece. Would that the other opinion writers of the papers had the guts and honesty to defend their pieces to their readers likewise. Many thanks to Ms. Shawl.
And she shouldn't allow hypersensitive critics - purporting to defend elves, gnomes, trolls (anyone ever SEE one of those, other than on a binge?) against 'heightists' (an obvious slur invented by the PC crowd to use against the rest of us) - to hijack the discussion in favor of minute and trivial details.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on November 4, 2007 10:09 AMHaving read quite a bit of each, I think I can confidently point out that Fantasy literature (at least when Humans are involved) is far less Integrated and Multicultural than Science Fiction.
I've never quite understood why the two very different types of literature get lumped together, especially when the overall label of SF is used (god forbid that the contraction Sci-Fi is applied).
I'm just sayin'...
Posted by: Aurelius on November 4, 2007 12:51 PMI'd say even his military views were libertarian. He never favored nation-building in his writings. He only favored defensive war. He promoted the right to bear arms. He believed in a strong national defense, but not being the policeman of the world. He wanted lots of participation in the military as a way to keep the military in touch with the will of the people. I'd call him a non-interventionist, like Ron Paul.
And Nisi, we are still waiting for an apology from you for calling our genre racist and sexist. You may be right about individual science fiction authors, but labeling the whole classic science fiction genre as racist or sexist is a form of prejudice. You have offended many of your readers by doing this. I'd say this act is NOT in your own interests, much less your paper's. I look forward to a retraction and an apology. You should publish it in your paper, which I am proud to say I don't subscribe to.
You have proven Bill C's contention above, that liberalism is not about tolerance. By the way, libertarianism IS. Liberty reguires tolerance of the peaceful behavior of others.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 4, 2007 04:51 PMLook at this: Ms Shawl now worries about discrimination based on her age! Another victim cubicle she can choose to occupy. http://www.reflectionsedge.com/archives/oct2007/ngaiwns_sd.html
"I'm 52. For many years I looked much younger I actually was, but that seems to have changed lately. I'm now experiencing a different sort of discrimination based on age."
I'm a bit older than 52. The thought of age discrimination has never entered my mind. Then again, I'm not a liberal.
I wish Ms. Shawl the best, and I think if she throws off the chains of liberalism she might enjoy the sunrise every day.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on November 4, 2007 06:03 PMAnd won't until their rags collapse under their fundamental dishonesties (excuse me, alternative realities) overwhelm them.
And even then they'll sing the "victim" song.
Posted by: Bill on November 4, 2007 06:17 PMShould race run deeper than skin deep? I do not think so and it seems to me that to act as if it does is to act with the same well meaning rasism that prompted civil-war era slave owners to treat blacks as if they were a lesser species.
If we really want to celebrate racial diversity, shouldn't we acknowledge someone's race, ebrace the unique perspective they bring to the table, and then leave it at that? Wouldn't that be enough, without fostering the reverse-racist mindset that passes as affirmative action? This commentator, for one, thinks so.
Posted by: ChiBlade on November 4, 2007 06:54 PMI forgot to answer your question about when the Moon is a Harsh Mistress was published. It was in 1966 which i would consider not really early or late. But I suppose leaning torwards the late side. Also of note even though most people have not read it, they are familiar with the term, TANSTAAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch) which Heinlein either created or at the very least popularized in this book.
The book is a masterpiece in my opinion. I put it up there with Atlas Shrugged in terms of fiction that has changed peoples lives torwards liberty and libertarianism.
Posted by: Travis Pahl on November 4, 2007 07:27 PM
Robert A. Heinlein in The Robert Heinlein Interview And Other Heinleinana by J. Neil Schulman
I would say that my position is not too far from that of Ayn Rand's; that I would like to see government reduced to no more than internal police and courts, external armed forces--with the other matters handled otherwise. I'm sick of the way the government sticks its nose into everything, now.
Posted by: Scott on November 5, 2007 09:14 AM