Beyond This Horizonby Robert A. Heinleinread by Peter GanimBeyond This Horizon is classic science fiction with social commentary thrown in as you may expect from Heinlein. Mankind has created a Utopian society where poverty and hunger are studied in school but don't actually happen anymore. Mankind has also worked toward eliminating weaknesses in the human chromosome via gene selection and intentional breeding. There are still some normal people (referred to as "control naturals") that could potentially provide new genetic mutations for the good of mankind.Hamilton Felix genetically represents the best of what humanity has to offer. He gets wrapped up in a group plotting to overthrow the government that thinks only the best of humanity should thrive in society while the control naturals are destroyed or used for experiments. There is little risk or adventure in this society, so a bored Hamilton decided to act as a mole within this organization. It's not really surprising that this novel came out in the 1950's when eugenics and superiority of different races was a current topic.While their society is Utopian and futuristic, they also have notions of honor and violence such that people can get into gun duels when slighted. I found Heinlein's debate of honor and privilege in this to be interesting in much the same way as his notions of earning rights by military service in Starship Troopers.I liked the main plot as described but thought it could have happily ended about halfway through. The main plot of the story wraps up and the second half of the book felt like a really long epilogue to me. Heinlein seems to spread himself a bit thin on so many different issues like government influence of the market, government spending, the meaning of life, telepathy, duels for honor, and the afterlife. There were a few looong monologues/dialogues going into painful detail of chromosome selection where I had trouble paying attention and following the book.On the audio book side of things, Peter Ganim does a good job. I thought he had a good conversational tone, did some decent voices (they didn't differ much though), and was easy to understand. If you're trying to decide whether reading or listening is preferable, I don't think there is much benefit either way.Helpful tip if listening to this book: Hamilton Felix (superman, star line, game making guy) is referred to as "Hamilton" in the first half of the book but people start calling him "Felix" later for some reason. This wouldn't be confusing except that his friend Monroe-Alpha Clifford (finance, mathematician guy) also goes by "Monroe-Alpha" and "Clifford" at different times. Since Ganim's voices aren't very distinct, there were some moments where it took me a little bit to realize which character was talking.
Good but very dated. I think the people who pan this title aren't quite as savvy as they think they are. Does one diss Jules Verne because his books did not hold up to later scientific fact? Of course not. This book was published in 1942, for pete's sake! Why are people jumping all over the genetics in it? Let's put things in context - the world was at war (WW II), the Nazis were trying to create a master-race, and in general there was a huge struggle going on between totalitarianism and democracy. There is little veiling of the similarities of the Nazi aims (as seen from the US at the time) and what is given as backstory/history in this novel. That Heinlein was taking on the issues he was, in a serialised format no less (first release) is a testament to his risk-taking and ground-breaking story-telling. Is this my favorite work by him - no. But it is far from the dog many put forward here.I'm going to soapbox for a minute on what I think happens when Heinlein is brought up. One of the first things is he is called a Libertarian and there are those who put a lot of baggage on that. Often those same people then lump him and H Beam Piper as either 'libertarian-fascists' or 'fascist-libertarians,' - which is complete and utter non-sense. I leave you to find Charles Stross himself putting forward this drivel on Youtube before an appreciative audience (drones). That anyone can link Libertarian and Fascist together, as if they have similar meanings, is just incredible. It is political partisanism taken to extremes. Neither Beam nor Heinlein will be running for office any time soon so relax!If you are a serious Heinlein fan or you are trying to work through his entire catalog, this particualr read is good for what it is. If you are a casual fan or merely wanting to sample Heinlein, then there are a number of other titles you should pursue. And if you have political motivations behind what you read (and then choose to not enjoy), fine. Just don't be disingenious with your critiques of older works - please.
Do You like book Beyond This Horizon (1979)?
First time I've read this book in several (for some definitions of the word several). It's mostly noted, and maybe notable for its first few sentences, where Heinlein uses phrasing to put you in the midst of his future world. "The door dilated" is justly famous. His portrayal of a society where everyone (or most people) carry weapons (of one sort or another) is known to with its supposed corollary an armed populous is a polite populous. i don't buy it, and he really doesn't demonstrate here. As David Brin pointed out recently, in an essay that reminded me I hadn't read this book in a long time, those who support its views on gun control pretty much ignore the other aspect of its utopia: people get all their needs taken care of by the government. Nobody has to work to earn a living. Other points about the society are that there's a bureaucracy that is guiding society, mostly through advising people on their breeding and how to improve the race. Eugenics! As able as Heinlein is at using language in the first pages to dump you right into the world, the book is clumsy with a lot of its exposition, especially the early stuff about the eugenics wars. Two people sit there telling each other what they would have known forever, just so we can hear it. The plotting is a mess, too, with a silly revolution that is not well-drawn, and some very silly male-female relationship stuff. In most ways, this book is a real failure.But. As is often with Heinlein, I very much enjoyed reading it. This isn't as bad as Sixth Column, Heinlein's other early novel I read recently. It has some entertaining spots, but by the end it grew tiresome. Maybe I'll read it again in another 30 years.
—Steve
This is not Heinlein's best book. Characters are cardboard, scenes are naive, plot is flat. However it has the thing I like about Heinlein most - deep themes which makes you think in philosophical terms The perfect society where people do not enjoy it as much as one would think Quest for perfection The conflicts which can arise from engineering people Hedonism Personal responsibilityAll those things are not very well developed but they are there. And it was one of the most influential books I read in my teenage years.
—Max Beliy
I was disappointed. I love Heinlein's work, but this story was not as good as what would come later. There were potentially three or four strong concepts to build a story on (like most men being armed and living by a gentleman's code of honor), but nothing was ever fleshed out beyond two or three vignettes. The bulk of the story felt like a 1940s textbook on gene manipulation. It's a science fiction book, so science explanations are to be expected, but sometimes it felt overdone and I just wanted to get back to the actual characters. The latter half of the story hinged on finding the meaning of life, the universe, and everything, which was paid off weakly to not at all depending on how you look at it. I enjoyed the short sections about the man from the 1920s trying to get football going again in this far flung future and a well written Alamo-style gun battle. Monroe-Alpha's character, if better developed, could have been quite interesting. He reminded me a great deal of Bernard from Brave New World. A novel which I think handled the eugenics based Utopia in a more organized and intriguing way than this story.It's by no means an awful book, it just didn't live up to my own expectations for it.
—Joseph Newberry
