The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress

I should preface this review by saying that A) it is my first exposure to Heinlein and B) I am only slightly more knowledgeable about international politics than a reclusive hobbit. That said, this book was on my list and I am rather compulsive about lists, so here goes.

The book is pretty dated from the start. I found it pretty adorable when Mannie initially asks Mike to print-out all of those documents. Hi, 1966. How ya doing? That dated sense bleeds into a lot of the social aspects of the book too, particularly the role of women, but that's a risk any science fiction author takes when setting a book in the not too distant future. It jarred me out of the story a bit, but not to a level that depreciated my enjoyment.

A podcast I follow said you could really approach this book from one of two ways: as a political book and as a science fiction book. The political aspects are massive and, to me at least, pretty unbelievable. The character of Professor Bernardo de la Paz is essentially infallible and for some reason always has exactly the right answer to the situation, never losing control of his plan. The other characters (Mike excepted) serve only to ask the leading questions that allow Prof to cement his points. I was reminded somewhat of the Foundation Trilogy by some parts. Prof seemed like a high-speed Hari Seldon. Seldon, however, is a more believable prophet, because his plans are interrupted by complications. Prof's plans always go smoothly if not without sacrifice.

Politics isn't a territory I'm competent discussing though and was the least interesting part of the book for me. I definitely approached the novel from a science fiction perspective, and there I found a number of things to enjoy. First and foremost among these was Mike. Looking at Heinlein's 1966 conception of a supercomputer and comparing it with artificial intelligence levels today is really fascinating. Again, ignoring technology advances Heinlein couldn't have foreseen, Mike is a genuine character from the start and evolves as much (and frequently more) than other characters. We watch him experiment with humor, emotion, and at the end he even adopts a Loonie speech pattern or two. It's sort of an AI coming of age story. He's quite an enormous cheat (and takes a lot of the fun out of conspiracy when one of your conspirators is basically a god), but he's a fun cheat to watch.

I love the way Mike gives equal importance to understanding humor and plotting revolution. I love that Mike develops different personae and preferences for each one. I like the relationship between Mike and Mannie, and the way that Mannie accepts Mike as intelligent and even emotional based on their interactions.

The only other aspect of the book that really intrigued me was Heinlein's description of life on Luna. It does seem possible that the moon would become the next colonial Australia and have a similar development track (minus indigenous populations). I still can't say I fully understand how a line marriage works, but hey, if it becomes a socially embedded construct, it might fly. All of the rules on Luna are socially embedded constructs really. You play nice or you die. There's no leeway.

The other aspects of the book didn't do much for me. The characters were pretty flat, and I have strong issues with how Heinlein treats the “fems.” I didn't care about anyone besides Mike. I was bogged down in the political dialogues more than once and found myself pushing to get to some actual action. There's food for thought in the politics, but I'm not really up to dissecting it. Also, I don't think you can separate the politics from the surreal setting to apply it on modern earth.

Overall, it's a book I'm glad I read, but I doubt I'd read it again. It's probably a lot more interesting to the politically-minded, so if that's you, give it a shot.