Introduction

The relationship between Golden Age science fiction writers Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein is a topic of enduring interest among fans and scholars alike. Often portrayed as friendly competitors, this piece delves into the complexities of their inter-relationships, with a particular focus on Asimov's disapproval of Heinlein. This discussion includes insights from Astounding: John W. Campbell, Isaac Asimov, Robert A. Heinlein, L. Ron Hubbard, and the Golden Age of Science Fiction, a compelling book by James Mann.

The Golden Boys of Astounding

John W. Campbell was the editor of Amazing Stories and Astounding Science Fiction, nurturing a generation of science fiction luminaries. Isaac Asimov, Robert A. Heinlein, and L. Ron Hubbard were among the brightest of these “Golden Boys.” Despite this camaraderie, there was never an outright rivalry or animosity between Asimov and Heinlein. Their interactions were marked more by mutual respect and, to a lesser extent, professional collaboration.

Asimov's Perception of Heinlein

One of the reasons for Asimov's disapproval of Heinlein could be found in a statement from one of Asimov's memoirs. In comparing Heinlein to Clifford Simak, as stated in Astounding, Asimov described Simak as a "much better person." This sentiment may indicate Asimov's perception of Heinlein's character as being less admirable or kind.

The Controversial Heinlein

As interest in Heinlein's work has evolved with time, many now find aspects of his writing offensive. Rereading Stranger in a Strange Land, for instance, many contemporary readers find the book highly sexist. Similarly, Heinlein's other works, such as Farnam's Freehold and Sixth Column, contain problematic content that modern sensibilities find troubling.

Beyond Libertarians: A More Nuanced Understanding

There is a prevailing narrative that Heinlein was a libertarian, largely influenced by Ayn Rand. However, this view is challenged by the fact that Heinlein was a Naval Academy graduate and his thought was more uniformly Hegelian in nature. Moreover, his characterizations in works such as Starship Troopers do not align with the typical libertarian ideals but rather reflect a Hegelian perspective on societal structures.

Libertarian vs. Hegelian Perspectives

The distinction between leftist and rightist libertarians, as exemplified by figures like William F. Buckley and the John Birch Society, is often rooted in the same Hegelian dialectic. This perspective argues that both sides use a form of reasoning that can be seen as "finite games," where the goal is victory rather than the truth. Heinlein, however, never deconstructed the Hegelian historical gestalt to make a point; instead, he maintained a more traditional narrative that reflects the Platonic ideals of his time.

Starship Troopers: A Case Study

{Starship Troopers} was often criticized as a fascist manifesto, yet its accurate depiction of a military culture rooted in Plato's Republic suggests a more complex understanding. Heinlein's critique of the authoritarian military system was grounded in his military experiences and the lessons learned from World War II. The book's small unit battle drill reflects a real-world military doctrine that was later tested and validated by the U.S. Army's Ranger School.

Conclusion

While Asimov and Heinlein shared many mutual interests and professional associations, their personal philosophies and ideological differences were significant. Understanding these divergences provides a more nuanced view of both writers and their place in the history of science fiction. Asimov's anti-war libertarianism stands in stark contrast to Heinlein's Hegelian worldviews, illustrating a broader spectrum of thought within the genre.