A claim that a book or novel "the most famous science-fiction novel ever written" is too subjective.
Personally, I don't think Stranger in a Strange Land is the most famous science-fiction novel ever written. It is certainly, without a doubt, one of the most famous sci-fi novels ever written (never going out of print, according to Wikipedia) but not the most famous because, like I said, claiming something that encompassing is a bit of a stretch given each individual reader's personal bias or preference.
The novel presents an interesting scenario: a human born on Mars, raised the Martian way by Martians, returns to Earth and after experiencing the human culture teaches humans how to live a better life. While such a scenario might not seem out of the norm of sci-fi books and movies nowadays, back when the novel first saw light in the 1960s, it was revolutionary. The story itself and ideas Robert Heinlein presented in the book were revolutionary as they would've been viewed as anti-Church, anti-government, and immoral by the societal standards then. Heinlein's timing of publishing the book however was perfect -- the world was just at the cusp of a cultural revolution that in latter years spawned hippies and made the flower and the peace sign icons of the times. Cultural-revolutionists grokked Stranger in a Strange Land as the book of their times and I cannot argue -- the book was published at the right place, and at the right time.
Thus, it would be difficult for yours truly to understood the depth at which this sci-fi novel helped usher the counter-revolution of the 60s and 70s. I wasn't born then. I read the book too late. What were once revolutionary ideas back when the book was first published are now common place and I speak of ideas, scenarios, and actual objects described in the book.
But let's take a closer look at Stranger in a Strange Land in the context of a read.
It's an interesting read.
Firstly, there's the language in which the novel was written. While it's certainly English, it's English circa the 1960s and one will encounter the jargons, idioms, and sayings of the times that might make reading the story a tad difficult. But not too difficult that you can't understand it. For the entirety of the novel, I didn't consult a dictionary or the internet for a jargon or idiom I came across and instead relied on contextual reading to grok the entire sentence or paragraph. If you do however like to read your books in contemporary, colloquial English then this might not be your cup of tea.
The novel can categorically be divvied up into two parts.
The first half introduces us to the protagonist, Michael Valentine Smith (Mike), the human born and raised on Mars and the conflict of getting him away from the manipulative clutches of the government. This half of the novel presents the first climax of the story when Mike's defenders (Jubal Harshaw, Jill Boardman, et al) successfully obtain freedom for Mike from the government.
This event leads to the second half of the novel where readers are taken on a road-trip by Heinlein as to what Mike does after he obtains his freedom: from his fast-tracked human education, to religious debates with other characters, to Mike's imparting of Martian influence particularly the ritual of water-sharing, and his eventual leaving of Jubal's household to find out things in the world. Readers are then treated to Mike (and Jill as his guide) trying to grok what it means to be human: becoming a magician and using his telekinetic powers to perform genuine tricks, to his delving into religion, and his eventual founding of the Church of All Worlds that eventually leads to his death or discorporation.
Heinlein used Stranger as a vehicle to voice his opinions and ideas on -- essentially what he thought of -- government, politics, art, religion, and sex. Yes, the last two items I believe would've caused the most of uproars back in Heinlein's time. Most of the points raised by Heinlein, notably in dialogue exchanges between Jubal and Mike, would've been called "progressive" or "immoral" elicitting strong emotions then but reading them in the context of "today", one can't help but be passive.
But passive as they might have come across, one can't help but linger for a bit on each and every dialogue that dealt with what was a controversial topic -- government, politics, art, religion, and sex. The novel, where such topics appeared, invited you to rethink your own beliefs and value-system and juxtapose them with the prevalent societal norm. Here was a voice from the past, harkening ideas that continue to be thought and talked about even today.
I particularly liked Jubal's treatise on "art" (if I recall correctly, this was a dialogue exchange between him and Ben Caxton) which I have to admit, I agree with completely.
The sex "scenes" were rather tastefully done which surprised me. I expected raunchiness as the book was a target for moralists but instead the sex, even though it was central to the fullness of water-sharing, was muted. If you were expecting something hot and torrid, you're better off buying an issue of FHM or Maxim.
Over on the sci-fi side of things, one gets the feeling that the story isn't too far off in the future although this could be because of the half-century that has passed since the novel was written. What was scientifically-futuristic then might not be applicable today such as that I was jarred when Caxton was describing a bugging device to be as big as a lighter when nowadays' depiction of bugging devices are so minuscule. But that can't be helped. Heinlein did present to us a plausible future (as Heinlein was a proponent of sci-fi where sci-fi things worked and had scientific basis) where there is one single government on Earth, of one where exploration to Mars is finally achievable, and where the human psyche when developed properly can be a powerful weapon.
Overall, Stranger in a Strange Land is a selective read in that not all who read it will grok it and like it. Personally, I liked it. It was a deviation from more recent sci-fi reads of the Legends of Dune. However, I felt that the first half of the story was the stronger of the two halves as the second half sort of hurried through the scenes. I don't know if this was due to the original novel being cut down prior to publication in 1961 but the second half lacked the depth and the action that propelled the story to climax to that showdown between Jubal and Secretary-General Douglas. I believe the second half lacked ummph, even the discorporation of Mike wasn't as powerful as it was supposed to be.
Would I recommend reading the novel? Surely ... to those who like some diversity in their sci-fi readings and not to those inclined to read just one sort of sci-fi.
Final Rating: 3.5 / 5
