From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

This is a book review. Anyone who thinks that book reviews don't belong
here should skip to the next article.

The book is /Variable Star/, by Robert Heinlein and Spider Robinson. A posthumous collaboration. I had never heard of it until I saw it in a
Sydney bookshop. I don't know how it ends, but I'm halfway through it
and that's enough to comment.

The background: after Heinlein and his wife were both dead, someone
found detailed notes and a plot outline that Heinlein had prepared in
1955 for a book /The Stars are a Clock/. He never wrote it. Instead he
wrote /Time for the Stars/, published 1956, on a somewhat related theme.

When the notes were discovered, someone decided that the book ought to
be written, and chose Spider Robinson. Robinson is a reasonably good
writer, and he is ideologically and literarily compatible with Heinlein,
so is well placed to imitate the Heinlein flavour. He has just one flaw
that stops him from being a really good writer. He is addicted to word
play, and he wrecks the quality of his writing by including it, no
matter how corny or unoriginal, in places where he really ought to have
kept his mouth shut.

This book is, anyway, pretty good. He controls himself somewhat, and
keeps the lousy puns to a minimum. I assume that an editor has gone
through and deleted the worst cases. The ones that remain are only
mildly annoying.

It's unlike a typical Heinlein book in one respect: it doesn't have a
central character who is an insufferable conceited arsehole.

The blurb on the back of the book says "Faithful to the spirit of
Heinlein's original vision and laced with contemporary touches that will
appeal to modern readers, ...". This is completely wrong. It doesn't
read like a 1955 book. The style is more modern than contemporary. That, however, is only my gripe about misuse of the word "contemporary".

In /Time for the Stars/, Heinlein revealed something he didn't intend:
he thought he understood special relativity, and he didn't. That book is
about the twin paradox. In my not-so-humble opinion, someone who doesn't understand the twin paradox shouldn't write a book about it. But it was
a success anyway, so maybe most readers didn't understand it either.

This book reveals that Spider Robinson has the same misconceptions,
possibly to a lesser degree. But again, maybe the readers won't notice.

By coincidence (or maybe not), this book has one feature of the earlier
book: twin telepaths, one on earth and one on the spaceship, who can communicate instantaneously. Neither author seems to have noticed a
problem: if you can communicate with zero delay, by any means including telepathy, then that invalidates the whole of special relativity. Which
would be embarrassing for those physicists whose experiments and
observations confirmed the validity of special relativity.

Final summary. The book is interesting enough that I intend to finish
reading it.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Verily, in article <108u1kn$2e33h$1@dont-email.me>, did
peter@pmoylan.org deliver unto us this message:

Final summary. The book is interesting enough that I intend to finish
reading it.

I won't give spoilers, but I'll be interested to hear what you make of
the ending.
--
Doctor Who: The Mind of Evil (Third Doctor)
Watch party on Saturday, 1:00 PST https://discord.gg/mw4QzndY?event=1408952064645795852
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 30/08/25 21:16, Melissa Hollingsworth wrote:

Verily, in article <108u1kn$2e33h$1@dont-email.me>, did
peter@pmoylan.org deliver unto us this message:

Final summary. The book is interesting enough that I intend to
finish reading it.

I won't give spoilers, but I'll be interested to hear what you make
of the ending.

Mixed feelings. On the one hand, it did satisfactorily tie everything
up. On the other, it relies on implausible coincidences.

One thing did annoy me, At the beginning of Chapter 17, we have this:

<quote>
You know the date. Everyone does. Everyone always will.
If we're lucky.
Everyone everywhere has their own story. For me, this is the way the
world ended. Not with a whim, but with a banker.
</quote>

Without giving spoilers, I will confirm that this was indeed a major catastrophe. So was this the right time to come up with a lousy pun?

Now that I've seen the ending, I'm convinced of one thing. This is the
same book as /Time for the Stars/. Different author, different plot, but
the same overall feel, and with a similar rescue at the end. And
precisely the same errors of physics.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 2025-08-30 16:45, Peter Moylan wrote:

On 30/08/25 21:16, Melissa Hollingsworth wrote:

Verily, in article <108u1kn$2e33h$1@dont-email.me>, did
peter@pmoylan.org deliver unto us this message:

Final summary. The book is interesting enough that I intend to
finish reading it.

I won't give spoilers, but I'll be interested to hear what you make
of the ending.

Mixed feelings. On the one hand, it did satisfactorily tie everything
up. On the other, it relies on implausible coincidences.

One thing did annoy me, At the beginning of Chapter 17, we have this:

<quote>
You know the date. Everyone does. Everyone always will.
If we're lucky.
Everyone everywhere has their own story. For me, this is the way the
world ended. Not with a whim, but with a banker.
</quote>

Without giving spoilers, I will confirm that this was indeed a major catastrophe. So was this the right time to come up with a lousy pun?

Now that I've seen the ending, I'm convinced of one thing. This is the
same book as /Time for the Stars/. Different author, different plot, but
the same overall feel, and with a similar rescue at the end. And
precisely the same errors of physics.

Unsurprising. They are two of my least favourite science fiction authors.
--
It's all shits and giggles, until someone giggles and shits.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> wrote:

This is a book review. Anyone who thinks that book reviews don't belong
here should skip to the next article.

[-]

In /Time for the Stars/, Heinlein revealed something he didn't intend:
he thought he understood special relativity, and he didn't. That book is about the twin paradox. In my not-so-humble opinion, someone who doesn't understand the twin paradox shouldn't write a book about it. But it was
a success anyway, so maybe most readers didn't understand it either.

Are sure sure? Taking time dilatation and twin paradoxes literally
has consequences which are just to dreary to make a good story.
I think most science fiction writers swindle it in some way,
with various plot devices.

Heinlein not respecting the laws of physics
shouldn't have come as a surprise to you.
After all, he is the author of the best time travel stories
of the golden age, perhaps of all time.
What more can you do in the way of not respecting the laws of physics?

Jan


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Verily, in article <108vuuj$2t86k$1@dont-email.me>, did
peter@pmoylan.org deliver unto us this message:

Mixed feelings. On the one hand, it did satisfactorily tie everything
up. On the other, it relies on implausible coincidences.

I'm glad you liked it enough for mixed feelings. :)

Do I need rot13 for spoilers this old? I'll play it safe, since you
avoided spoilers.

Gur urebrf ghearq vagb gur ivyynvaf, VZB. Gurl unir ab ernfba gb oryvrir Pbaenq zrnaf gurz nal unez, naq gur fvghngvba vf fhpu gung gur gevb bs
gur fznyy fuvc vf zhpu zber qrfcrengr guna gur perj bs gurve bja ynetre
fuvc (juvpu vf n yvgreny pbybal fuvc naq unf nyy gur fhccyvrf).

Gurl whfg hc naq *qrpvqr*, jvgu ab onfvf bgure guna gurve bja
vzntvangvbaf, gung ur'f cebonoyl tbvat gb orgenl uvz... naq guvf
whfgvsvrf orgenlvat uvz svefg. Gur cebgntbavfg gbcf guvf bss ol
cergraqvat gb srry fbeel sbe gur zna ur orgenlrq, fzhtyl guvaxvat gung
abobql pnerf jung gung thl jnagf.

IMO, it was a flabbergastingly horrible ending to a book which had been readable up until that point. Did you have any thoughts on that aspect?

I've set followups to rec.arts.books, a group I'd like to revive, but
please feel free to change them back if you don't read that.
--
Doctor Who: The Claws of Axos (Third Doctor)
Watch party on Saturday, 1:00 PST https://discord.gg/GPf2xRyq?event=1411689588782796830
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 31/08/25 22:51, The True Melissa wrote:

Verily, in article <108vuuj$2t86k$1@dont-email.me>, did
peter@pmoylan.org deliver unto us this message:

Mixed feelings. On the one hand, it did satisfactorily tie
everything up. On the other, it relies on implausible
coincidences.

I'm glad you liked it enough for mixed feelings. :)

Do I need rot13 for spoilers this old? I'll play it safe, since you
avoided spoilers.

Gur urebrf ghearq vagb gur ivyynvaf, VZB. Gurl unir ab ernfba gb
oryvrir Pbaenq zrnaf gurz nal unez, naq gur fvghngvba vf fhpu gung
gur gevb bs gur fznyy fuvc vf zhpu zber qrfcrengr guna gur perj bs
gurve bja ynetre fuvc (juvpu vf n yvgreny pbybal fuvc naq unf nyy gur fhccyvrf).

Gurl whfg hc naq *qrpvqr*, jvgu ab onfvf bgure guna gurve bja
vzntvangvbaf, gung ur'f cebonoyl tbvat gb orgenl uvz... naq guvf
whfgvsvrf orgenlvat uvz svefg. Gur cebgntbavfg gbcf guvf bss ol
cergraqvat gb srry fbeel sbe gur zna ur orgenlrq, fzhtyl guvaxvat
gung abobql pnerf jung gung thl jnagf.

IMO, it was a flabbergastingly horrible ending to a book which had
been readable up until that point. Did you have any thoughts on that
aspect?

That didn't particularly bother me. Caution about the newcomers was
justified, given Conrad's past record. And, as I recall it, it was
Smithers who fired the first shot. I was more bothered by the fact that
the final direction of the book was based on highly improbable
happenings. And, as I've mentioned before, getting special relativity wrong.

I've set followups to rec.arts.books, a group I'd like to revive,
but please feel free to change them back if you don't read that.

I've added alt.usage.english back, because it's the only newsgroup I
read these days.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Verily, in article <1092is7$3gphv$1@dont-email.me>, did
peter@pmoylan.org deliver unto us this message:

I was more bothered by the fact that
the final direction of the book was based on highly improbable
happenings.

I guess we were supposed to bear the title in mind the whole time.
--
Doctor Who: The Claws of Axos (Third Doctor)
Watch party on Saturday, 1:00 PST https://discord.gg/GPf2xRyq?event=1411689588782796830
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2