Why did I like the book? I don't remember, that was so long ago. However, I can try to imagine. It could have been the "forbidden fruit" factor: Heinlein was one of the very few American authors banned on the far side of the Iron Curtain, as was anything which sounded even remotely erotic, so being caught in possession of erotica from him secured one's place in both the political and the criminal wing of any prison.
It could have been the speculations about the future that the author did get right, like the disintegration of the Communist system:
"A Rolls only by courtesy, my dear—body by Skoda, power plant by Imperial Atomics..." (Skoda would only collaborate with Rolls-Royce over Soviet Union's dead body, which is exactly what happened).
Or perhaps the gasoline-free future that is emerging even now:
"You should have seen a Rolls fifty years ago, before gasoline engines were outlawed"
Admittedly, many of his other predictions were wrong, like the body paint part: that never happened. I've never seen anyone use body paint in exactly the way Heinlein described it, and Internet searches for the term come back with no hits. Oh, well, that's why they call them "writers" and not "prophets" (Yes, I am aware of L. Ron Hubbard. He was neither.)
As I said, I can't explain why I liked the book, but then again I can rarely explain why I like something. On the other hand, I'm getting a clear idea about why so many of my fellow readers hate it: as another reviewer aptly put it, "it does not age well". Objectification of women may have been the norm in Heinlein's days, but today there are severe social, and often, monetary penalties for those who practice it. At least among the book-reading public there are. At least I would like to think so. So, that's where he got it wrong. He failed to foresee the inevitability of the structural changes in our society. He knew that this society's greatest weapon against the Soviets was freedom, yet somehow managed to miss the obvious fact that this weapon is at only 50% power, for half the people were not really free.
But going back in time and slamming a long-dead author for failing to make an accurate prediction is not exactly nice, either. "I Will Fear No Evil" may not be Heinlein's greatest book. I'm even willing to concede that it's one of his weakest. Nevertheless, it represents at worst a failure to write well, and in no way a failure of the author's moral character. For if that is the case, I have a much more worthy candidate for your virtual auto-da-fé: a glorifier of underage sex and mutual statutory rape having taken place a long time ago in a town called Verona.
As asked, FOR THE LOVE OF CTHULHU
It could have been the speculations about the future that the author did get right, like the disintegration of the Communist system:
"A Rolls only by courtesy, my dear—body by Skoda, power plant by Imperial Atomics..." (Skoda would only collaborate with Rolls-Royce over Soviet Union's dead body, which is exactly what happened).
Or perhaps the gasoline-free future that is emerging even now:
"You should have seen a Rolls fifty years ago, before gasoline engines were outlawed"
Admittedly, many of his other predictions were wrong, like the body paint part: that never happened. I've never seen anyone use body paint in exactly the way Heinlein described it, and Internet searches for the term come back with no hits. Oh, well, that's why they call them "writers" and not "prophets" (Yes, I am aware of L. Ron Hubbard. He was neither.)
As I said, I can't explain why I liked the book, but then again I can rarely explain why I like something. On the other hand, I'm getting a clear idea about why so many of my fellow readers hate it: as another reviewer aptly put it, "it does not age well". Objectification of women may have been the norm in Heinlein's days, but today there are severe social, and often, monetary penalties for those who practice it. At least among the book-reading public there are. At least I would like to think so. So, that's where he got it wrong. He failed to foresee the inevitability of the structural changes in our society. He knew that this society's greatest weapon against the Soviets was freedom, yet somehow managed to miss the obvious fact that this weapon is at only 50% power, for half the people were not really free.
But going back in time and slamming a long-dead author for failing to make an accurate prediction is not exactly nice, either. "I Will Fear No Evil" may not be Heinlein's greatest book. I'm even willing to concede that it's one of his weakest. Nevertheless, it represents at worst a failure to write well, and in no way a failure of the author's moral character. For if that is the case, I have a much more worthy candidate for your virtual auto-da-fé: a glorifier of underage sex and mutual statutory rape having taken place a long time ago in a town called Verona.