Never before reprinted Heinlein
I’m surprised I hadn’t heard anything about this. Heinlein’s stinkeroos have been collected for the first time.
Though I’m an avid Heinlein fan, I don’t plan to seek this out — these are stories he disavowed from fairly early on as being too bad to reprint. Given how bad the worst of the rest of his stories are, that’s repudiation enough for me.
"I’m surprised I hadn’t heard anything about this. Heinlein’s stinkeroos have been collected for the first time."
This seems to me to be a nasty characterization of a good book.
There are some great stories here. Why poop on them so?
"Jerry Was a Man" was a "stinkeroo"? "Goldfish Bowl"? "The Year of the Jackpot"? "Gulf"?
What are you on about here? These are great stories. Classics. WTF?
Posted by Gary Farber on December 13 2005 09:49
Also, the claim that they've "have been collected for the first time" seems just nuts. In what universe?
(Minor note: why does the thingie here in which to enter one's words seem to stretch on for miles? It's both exasperating and weird.)
Posted by Gary Farber on December 13 2005 09:53
I think you skipped the stinkeroos link, Gary. It's a well-known term among Heinlein fanatics referring to three specific stories for which "stinkeroos" was Heinlein's own term, which he did not allow to be collected.
Bearing that in mind, I think you'll see that it's in this universe that those three specific stories had never been collected, and that there was no disparagement of the remaining stories being made.
If I didn't have all the rest of the stories already, I'd join the SFBC in a heartbeat to get this.
Posted by Zed on December 13 2005 10:58