Robert Anson Heinlein

Farmer in the Sky

7.3
Diez ko regulāri es zinātnisko fantastiku nelasu, bet reizēm gadās, un šī ir viena no šīm reizēm. Roberts Hainlains tiek uzskatīts par vienu no ievērojamākajiem amerikāņu zinātņu fantastiem un vismaz vienu lielisku viņa darbu - "Durvis uz vasaru" - arī es iepriekš jau biju lasījis. Plus "Fermeris debesīs" 1951.gadā ieguva Hugo balvu kā labākais Sci-Fi romāns, un Hugo balva - tā tev nav kaka uz kociņa. Var pieminēt, ka citus gadus šo balvu ir dabūjuši Frenks Bredberijs, Aizaks Azimovs, Filips Diks, Frenks Herberts, Rodžers Želaznijs, Klifords Saimaks, Artūrs Klārks un pat J.K.Roulinga par vienu no Harija Potera daļām - īsi sakot, nav tā, ka tā būt neprestiža balva. Kurts Vonnegūts, starp citu tikai trīs reizes ticis nominēts, vinnējis nav ne reizi.
2007-08-17 00:00:00
book, 1950

The Door into Summer

7.5
I`d read it before, and more than once, but why can`t I re-read a piece of sci-fi I like? The story itself isn`t particulary groundbreaking but it`s warm enough to fill my cold limbs and it`s believable enough for science fiction. Daniel Boone Davies is a 30 year old scientist who goes into "cold sleep" (suspended animation") for some thirty years. He does that out of personal problems when his fiancee and his best friend have cheated him and driven him deep into alcoholism. But when he awakes in year 2000 he decides that he wants to go back. Not because he dislikes the 21st century but because he has unsettled business in the past (not a particulary original storyline you may say). I admit that but D.B`s desire to go back in time to find his beloved (no zoophily) cat and to sleep for some years so his friends step-daughter would be old enough to marry him (strangely, no pedophily either, as a matter of fact Heinlein tries hard to convince the reader that no dirty deeds with children are involved in the story, which only leads the reader to believe that Heinlein is just protecting his hero). In terms of technology most of the stuff described in this book is quite funny for science hasn`t gone in a way similar to Heinlein`s predictions but that`s fine with me for I don`t read science fiction to find there some realistic descriptions of the future. If I want to know anything about the year 2000 I can always simply google it. I almost pressed the "submit" button when I realized that I haven`t mentioned how much I like/dislike this book. To improve myself I can say that I like it although I`m not sure why. It has some good humour and it has likeable characters, maybe - that`s why. On the other hand maybe I like it only because I liked it when I read it the first time. Who knows?
2005-12-09 00:00:00
book, 1957