4.5

My first experience of Heinlein hadn’t been the best. I did appreciate Starship Troopers, but didn’t love it. This is not the case with this novel - far from it.

Where to start? There is So much. What seems at first a straightforward science fiction story is in fact a mixture of different genres, combining revolution, politics, philosophy, adventure and suspense, all this seasoned with historical, scientific and literary references, especially from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. With so many elements, the whole could have felt disjoined but Heinlein pulls it off, even if some sections are rather verbose :O)

The book starts with Mike self-awareness and his friendship with Mannie, which is lovely to witness. Heinlein uses Mannie as his narrator, not just because he is a likeable character, but also because he is intelligent, honest and decent, and so easy to identify with. Throughout the book, we are introduced to various characters, from complex main ones to supporting cast the main trio is great and could be seen as having a symbolic meaning: Prof as the Head, Wyoh as the Heart and Mannie as the Hands. Mike could even be the Soul. .

Since Heinlein wrote this book in the 1960s, I did fear that this future world would feel quite dated, but in fact it holds its own very well. Luna is an interesting setting, with a fascinating culture and social structure, all potentially waiting to explode. Loonies even have their ‘own’ language: a kind of pidgin, mixing English with other languages, such as Russian. The portrayal of women is interesting with some progressive aspects and others less so. Connected to this is the unusual concept of family. Loonies have adapted to their circumstances and demographic, and thus invented their own social structure and rules in order to survive.

And then the revolution. Just look at the date the author chose for his story - 2076 - and that should give you a clue (think 300 years prior). I did expect a lot of political and philosophical discourse, and they are present, but these are wide enough and from such an engaging angle that I did not mind them, and even enjoyed quite a few.

So yes I did enjoy this novel. Heinlein not only created an entertaining story but a though-provoking one where he asks the reader to think outside the box, not jump at conclusion, or discard any idea even the apparently foolish ones. Oh and There really Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch :O)

I'm giving this 3 stars in dubio pro reo, because I honestly couldn't concentrate on it if my life had depended upon it and therefore I certainly missed a lot of (good?) stuff. There was so much exposition and ridiculous commentary on women in there that I could not get into the story at all.

I absolutely acknowledge the importance of this book, cause I felt reminded of nearly every political space opera I've read so far and could see the big influence this work must have had onto them.

Yet Heinlein and me just don't seem to be compatible. I will read some more of his works, since I try to get through as many Hugo award winners as possible, but I'm not really looking forward to it.

If you liked Leviathan Wakes, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress has a similar gravity. In fact, by the end of it I felt like I had just read the prequel to the former, which, if you're keeping track, would make this the original, and Leviathan Wakes the spin-off.

The world-building in this is tremendous. The Moon is a thriving colony of humans who dream of independence. It is run by an artificial intelligence who isn't trying to kill everyone or take over the world--it just wants a laugh. The facets of this intelligence are what really fascinated me. Robert A. Heinlein had to explain how vast this intelligence was by explaining how interconnected technology might function, much in the same way H.G. Wells had to explain the concept of a man moving back-and-forth through time to an audience who could not yet comprehend such a thing. Heinlein had to explain that this entity was so powerful it could instantly pull a file on anyone, or even manufacture an unliving personality. A very eerie prognostication if one were to read this in present times. Fortunately, this AI was one of the good guys--as long as the good guys were the ones living on the Moon.

The story itself was almost an anarchist's handbook; thoughts on living without a government, thoughts on letting society function by itself. I find all the books of Heinlein that I've read are a handbook of one kind or another. George Orwell would have been a fan, I think.

I count this as my favourite Heinlein, thus far. That being said, they have all been good--I wish I had started reading his work earlier. Something worth noting if you are trying to decide whether to read Clarke, Asimov, or Heinlein for the first time is that Heinlein had the best characters of the three heavyweights.

A story not to be taken lightly, 4.25 stars.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress begins, promisingly enough, with a conversation between the sentient computer Mike and the mechanic Mannie, our protagonist, about the subjective and paradoxical nature of humor. It then segues into a revolution whereby the Moon, a penal colony used primarily as a farm to grow wheat to feed Earth's beleaguered masses, attempts to become an independent state. The revolution is planned and executed primarily by Mike, essentially an omniscient God, and everything which can go right goes right and everything which might go wrong does not. It seems then that The Moon is, in fact, a rather Lenient Mistress.

…and naïve, sexist, and outdated. But let’s start with the first one.

New Title: The Moon is a Lenient Mistress.

A clothesline with a pair of whitey-tighties has more dramatic tension than this book. Though there is, ostensibly, a macro-conflict in the form of Luna’s revolution, it doesn’t come across as such because everything always works out. Even when the plan appears to stumble, it actually turns out NOPE, it was all part of the plan. Computer Mike has no limitations and knows all. It's no surprise, and no spoiler either, to tell you the revolution succeeds. Manuel is clearly narrating in retrospect, a fact referenced multiple times throughout the book, which is itself largely told in summary, rather than depicted scene-by-scene.

What about micro-conflict? Ha! You may not have known this – I certainly didn’t – but revolutionaries are all extremely polite and well-behaved. The three main characters always agree or, if disagreeing slightly, happily defer to Professor (a blatant analogue of Heinlein himself). Any character who strongly disagrees just sort of vanishes. Any character who isn’t on the good side is portrayed as a bumbling, blithering idiot.

Course maybe Heinlein is just that good at mapping out a revolution. Maybe he’s a master of human nature. Maybe, should I ever plan a revolution, perhaps against our future McWalmart Overlords, I should exhume Heinlein’s body and use my necromantic powers to raise him as a zombie adviser. Except...

New Title: The Moon is a Naïve Mistress.

I’ll get to the dated technology in a moment, which has some excuse, but is there any excuse for an inaccurate depiction of human nature? To some degree, the lack of conflict makes sense because this is Old Sci-fi and in Old Sci-fi, drama and character often play a subordinate role to ideas and science. Much of the joy (and there is some) comes from reading this book as a Revolution For Dummies. But the joy is hampered by this book’s inauthentic depiction of the turbulence of revolution and of humanity and society in general.

Case in point: The very premise is absurd. Luna is a penal colony, filled almost exclusively with convicts (in the future, capital punishment is considered ‘inhumane’). Simultaneously, Loonies (those who live on the moon) are portrayed as being exceptionally polite. Simultaneously, a good HALF of those who arrive on Luna end up dead either through carelessness or murder. Simultaneously, there are no laws. Zero. Simultaneously with all this, Luna is depicted as a stable, healthy semi-utopia. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh... (wait for it) ...hhhhhhhhhhhhhh... (wait for it) ...hhhhhh no. Next up, I am a Nigerian prince who has $10,000,000 to give you. I just need your bank account information. We all know that in the absence of societal structure, the strong rule the weak. In fact, we have places without laws in the world, Somalia being one of them. Don’t think anyone would call it utopian.

In addition to his wildly naïve depiction of a libertarian society, Heinlein’s grasp of gender dynamics leaves much to be desired. On Luna, the ratio of female to males is wildly skewed, a 1:2 ratio at time of story but even worse in the years before. The result, according to Heinlein, is the empowerment of women. Because that’s definitely what's happening in India. Oh wait. No, the opposite occurred. Duh. Ironically, because Heinlein obviously attempted to do otherwise, the book’s depiction of women is nothing less than creepy thereby granting TITLE NUMBER THREE. Cue drumroll…:

New Title: The Moon is a Sexist Mistress.

Heinlein’s depiction of women is bad. He tries and if this were kindergarten, that’d earn him some points. But we’re in the big leagues of literature, aren’t we?! So it’s just creepy and sexist:

Practically every woman of note mentioned is described as beautiful. No ugly women allowed, apparently. When beautiful woman #1, Wyoming Knott, was introduced, I thought to myself, “Oh man. Dollars to donuts, main character sleeps with her.” For a bit, I thought I'd be owing myself some donuts but then in a surprise twist... she gets married into Mannie’s line marriage!

You know that rule in theater about how if a gun is mentioned or introduced in act one of a play, it will go off by act three? I propose a similar rule for beautiful women. If a "beautiful" woman is mentioned in the beginning of the book then she will be slept with by the end. That or she’ll be an evil murderess. Sorry beautiful women out there. That’s your fate in life, apparently.

I mean, despite narrator telling us that Loonie women are empowered and in charge of society, the book consistently depicts them in subordinate or domestic roles. Wyoming Knott is one of three main revolutionaries, right? The book suggests she's essential. Which is because she does… wait… what does she do? OH THAT’S RIGHT. NOTHING. She flirts, she spurs the men on. All other women are likewise depicted in this bizarre cheerleading role, or as mothers. Every woman (or girl!) of note eventually gets married, like it's the penultimate fate. Well what can ya say? It's a universal truth, right Jane Austen?

This book is super hardcore about placing women on a pedestal. Heinlein, who obviously doesn’t get human nature and even less woman nature, seems to believe that this is a GOOD depiction of women. Like omg they’re so amazing and dynamic and look at this SPUNKY female, free with her kisses and sexuality and can take and dish out insults with the best of em. Please, God of Literature, spare me from such inadvertently Lovecraftian horrors. The spunky female stereotype of an “empowered woman” is so eerie. It’s outdated, at the least, and you know what else is? The technology!

New Title: The Moon is an Outdated Mistress.

This book is lauded for its supposedly accurate depiction of engineering and technology. Huh? What? You mean, like how one of the main characters uses a phone with like a hundred meter cord in order to talk to the computer? Don’t even give me that context of the past nonsense. We had radios back then. Is it really that hard to extrapolate that we’d have personal radios (i.e. cellphones) in the future? Or how about when the main character uses PUNCHCARDS to program a super computer? Hahahahaha. Or here’s a good one: nuclear-warhead interceptor missiles cost “thousands” of dollars. Do I buy a used car or hydrogen bomb? Choices, choices.

That is the very definition of sci-fi failure. It’s a sci-fi writer’s job (particularly one writing in this hard sci-fi mode) to infer future ideologies and technologies. It’d be the equivalent of my writing a story set a hundred years in the future and having people still drive around in cars with internal combustion engines. Barring Mad Max style post-apocalypse, that is NOT going to happen. Or talking about a hamburger costing $5 a century from now. (In fact, for your information, at average rates of inflation, a $5 hamburger will cost $96 in a hundred years. Jeez.)

In summary, is The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? Nope. The Moon is a Lenient, Naïve, Sexist, and Outdated Mistress. This book doesn’t grant insight into humanity, it doesn’t depict a realistic future, it doesn’t even entertain. And it's creepy. At any given point while I was reading this, I could have put it down for good and been content. Basically, The Moon is a Boring Mistress. No one wants a boring mistress – and that’s the truth.

Originally posted at FanLit.
http://www.fantasyliterature.com/revi...

“Sometimes I think that government is an inescapable disease of human beings. But it may be possible to keep it small, and starved, and inoffensive.”

It’s the year 2075. The Earth, which has a worldwide government of Federated Nations, sends its criminals and exiles to the moon where they won’t bother anyone on Earth. The “Loonies” are governed by wardens who require them to grow hydroponic grain which is sent back to Earth. This has been going on for over a century, so the lunar colony is no longer just criminals and exiles. They’ve had families and have built a society, but they’re still treated as Earth’s slave labor force. They do work for Earth, but get no benefits. Now they want to be free.

When a computer technician named Mannie realizes that the moon’s central computer (Mike) is sentient and lonely, he befriends it and they begin, with the help of a professor and a radical young woman, to plan a revolution. Along the way Mike keeps calculating the chances of their success as new developments occur.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is the story of the American Revolution (or it could be any revolution) in a science fiction context. Readers familiar with Robert A. Heinlein won’t be surprised that this is an anti-authority story — Heinlein’s libertarian views are on full display and those of us with a libertarian streak will be rooting for the “Loonies” as they lament the inadequacies of representational government and demand a free market, a free press, voluntary rather than compulsory taxation, and the right for all citizens to be free and self-sufficient. (Heinlein’s libertarianism borders on anarchism, though, and his characters don’t seem to have a problem with stealing power, water, and phone services from the government, allowing the computer to steal money for their revolution, or rigging elections.) Heinlein’s fans also won’t be surprised to encounter an incestuous type of polygamy in the “line marriages” of the lunar colony.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is one of my favorite Heinlein stories. It’s exciting and well-plotted, has strong male and female characters of all ages and races (perhaps Mike the computer is the best character, though!), has some humor, interesting ideas about the purpose of government, and I learned enough about how to run a revolution that I feel like I’m prepared to plan my own. Plus, a catapult on the moon? That’s awesome! (Though Philip K. Dick did it first).

The style of The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is noteworthy. The Loonies come from all over the Earth and have developed their own slang. Mannie narrates the story in a choppy voice that skips a lot of personal pronouns and articles and sounds like he’s taking notes:

Proud of my ancestry and while I did business with Warden, would never go on his payroll. Perhaps distinction seems trivial since I was Mike’s valet from day he was unpacked. But mattered to me. I could down tools and tell them go to hell. Besides, private contractor paid more than civil service rating with Authority. Computermen scarce. How many Loonies could go Earthside and stay out of hospital long enough for computer school? — even if didn’t die. I’ll name one. Me. Had been down twice…

Listened to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress in audio format. Produced by Blackstone audio and read by Lloyd James. Took little while to get acclimated to Heinlein’s strange style in audio, but Lloyd James did great job, and got hang of it after not too long. Loved what he did with Mike the computer. Recommend this version.

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress was published in 1966 after being serialized in Worlds of If. It received a Hugo Award and was nominated for a Nebula Award.

“Free Luna! Luna shall be Free!”

Estamos a finales de este siglo y la luna es una colonia penitenciaria de la Tierra. Es un intercambio que interesa mucho al planeta porque se libran de los indeseables, que en el mejor de los casos y debido a sus cambios fisiológicos ya no pueden volver nunca; de manera que tienen mano de obra muy barata para producir grano en las granjas subterráneas lunares y así alimentar a un mundo superpoblado. En medio de todo ésto, aparece una IA muy curiosa, rodeada por personajes (un poquito apolillados después de casi 60 años) que a su lado son secundarios, con ganas de mandar a la Autoridad a tomar por donde amargan los pepinos. ¿A quién no le apetece una revolución de vez en cuando?

Sin ser ninguna maravilla, no está mal. Un buen editor actual haría maravillas con esta novela, porque el peor error que comete es su exceso de páginas. Estamos hablando de una novela de ciencia ficción política de mediados de los 60, así que podéis tomaros eso como un piropo.

Lo mejor es toda la filosofía y teoría política que mete en el embrollo, y que a pesar de eso da como resultado una historia entretenida. Para los curiosos por la CF clásica, merece la pena; no se la recomendaría a quien no esté acostumbrado al género porque pesan mucho todas esas páginas de sobra.

As cynical as I have become about revolutions, this novel managed to warm my heart. This story about Loonies (residents of Luna i.e. the Moon) rebelling against Earth government is so well written it is really a crime to miss it. As a big a crime as not starting a revolution when revolution is due. If you want to feed your inner rebel with a delicious story of lunar colony rebelling against mother Earth, then what are you waiting for? If you’re feeling philosophical, then this might be a good novel for you. It raises a lot of interesting question. Once you start reading this one, you’ll see it is not really about action (but there is a bit of that so don’t worry, it’s not one of those novels where nothing happens). There are many dialogues in there that will make you think.


You want to start a revolution? Why, here is a great handbook for you! Seriously thought, this is one of my favourites by Heinlein. It is political SF at its best. Besides being a great handbook on staging a revolution, this novel has others things going for it. Let’s start with the setting.
Luna Is A Harsh Mistress is set on Moon. No surprise there! What is somewhat surprising is the incredibly detail with which Heinlein describes this Lunar society. The Moon is a colony of Earth and as such has a very different culture, language and just about everything. The way the writer set the story and the care he gave to developing this setting is bloody brilliant.


So, the setting is pretty awesome. Moreover, the story is entertaing and high paced while giving you enough food for the thought. What else? Another great thing about this novel is that it has such as a fantastic cast of characters. There is Mike- and he’s a doll. I don't recall any other A.I or computer character that was so loveable. Yet, Mike is definitely my favourite character, but other (human) characters are not any less fascinating, for example there's Miguel. This slightly cynical loonie ( an ingenious term coined to describe a resident of Moon) is for most part a pretty easy-going guy despite the fact that he had his hand cut off and replaced with a tool in order to make a living. I remember this premise being used in some third rate Hollywood movie and it really annoyed me, how they stole that idea like that. But let's back to the characters: Professor Bernardo de la Paz is there for smart ideas and dialogues. Mimi the matriarch was also a lovely character. I'll stop here, although there are more of them that are worthy of mentioning.

There are many aspects of this novel that make it such a great read. It is a very thought provoking novel, though it may not seem that way at first. Sure it is the story about a rebellion against government and there is some action, but another thing you will get is a lot of interesting lessons about human societies wrapped up in nice dialogues. Dialogues, you say? Yes, many of them between an AI and human beings. I did say there is a fantastic cast of characters in this one. Accomplishing a complete racial integrity in a natural way is something that many novels still fail to do, but this novel does it. That’s exceptional considering the time when this novel was published. The concept of line marriages is something that was developed nicely and it fit in with character’s development. Loonies feel very much real both as individuals and members of society. By that I mean they are very convincingly portrayed, not just as individuals but as society as well.


Now, some may say that it is kind of convenient for a Moon revolution to have a computer that basically controls every aspect of life on Moon on its side. Well, I can’t deny that but that doesn’t mean that is the only reason why our AI is there. He ( I can’t make myself to call AI it) does help the revolution but his motivation actually makes sense. Heinlein wrote him in a very convincing way, right from his ‘awakening’, through his character development and finally to him becoming a well-rounded character with unique characteristics and a sense of humour. Sure, in our world today, a SF author wouldn’t need to explain what AI stands for. However, all these descriptions that wouldn’t be needed today don’t really make Mike’s characterization boring. They also don’t make the novel dated. Maybe they just feel a bit out of place, but that's all. Back to my point. I don’t see anything wrong with our AI being conveniently there. Sometimes in life, we do get a little lucky. I didn’t see that as weakness in a plot.

Political ideas expressed in this novel are often the kind that make one really think. The idea of writing a constitution in negative was a very refreshing one. There is a lot of interesting quotes to be found in this novel, for example: "In writing your constitution let me invite attention to the wonderful virtue of the negative! Accentuate the negative! Let your document be studded with things the government is forever forbidden to do. No conscript armies... no interference however slight with freedom of press, or speech, or travel, or assembly, or of religion, or of instruction, or communication, or occupation... no involuntary taxation." I think this novel can also be viewed as a warning against government control and colonization. Take this quote for example: "In past history popularly elected governments have been no better and sometimes far worse than overt tyrannies." Well, as depressing as it sounds, that’s actually true. One only needs to remember a few history lessons ( Hitler, Stalin) to realize the horrible truth behind this sentence. Just because a government was elected doesn’t make it a good one.

Injustice is often our reality and it is injustice that fuels the rebellion/revolution in this book. Every government is an organism that defends itself, an organism whose sole purpose is to sustain itself…and is it any wonder that it can’t do much good? Is there such a thing as a good government or is it always a choice between lesser evil? This novel does raise some really interesting questions, but in a way that is anything but overbearing. I suppose there is nothing extraordinary in stating that high government control often results in suppressed citizens. What is remarkable is writing a novel that expresses various issues with government control intelligently, using dialogue, while at the same time fluently talking about various other subjects (for example what does it mean to be human?) and having a decent plot and set of characters. What is remarkable is the novel itself. It is interesting to read, the plot develops well and quickly, there are no boring parts and all of the political and philosophical ideas are effortlessly included. What are you waiting for?

Well, I tried.

This is not a bad book by any means. But Heinlein’s decision to let his first-person narrator speak in broken English made this hard work for me.

I just never got into a real flow, and after three or four pages my mind always started to wander. So I actually had to force myself to think about the book's content instead of whether I’ve already done the laundry or not.

Right now this just hasn’t any of the things that I want from a book. Which is either be fun, or be educational, or be an audiobook, so that I can do something else while I’m reading you.

It wasn’t fun for me, because of the narrative voice. Even though I liked the guy. It wasn’t educational, because I’m currently not planning to stage a revolution. And, well, it isn’t an audiobook, because this one here was made of trees.

Alas. Maybe another time.

April 2020 group read in Hugo & Nebula Awards: Best Novels, which, I’m afraid, has to finish without me.

DNF: 61%

fikir hayli iyi, hele yazıldığı dönemi düşününce: bir şekilde bilinç kazanmış bir bilgisayar önderliğinde, dünya’dan sürülmüş bir toplumun ay’da yaptığı devrim. kitabın bir diğer iyi tarafı, bir bilim kurgu eserinden beklediğinizden çok daha fazla siyasi ve sosyolojik gözlem içermesi ve bunları her biri birbirinden farklı, gözünüzde canlandırabildiğiniz karakterlerin ağzından paylaşması. bu açılardan okuması, artık bilim kurgu edebiyatını biraz “geride bırakan” bana güzel bir sürpriz oldu ve keyifli bir okuma deneyimi sundu. öte yandan çok klişe tarafları ve daha da kötüsü mizojinist tarafları var ki; çağdaş bir kitap olsa camdan atardım, gelgelelim 60’larda yazılmış bir kitap, n’apıyoruz, neyssssse diyip göz devirip okumaya devam ediyoruz. dediğim gibi, bir okur olarak artık bilim kurgu ile pek bağımın kalmadığı bir noktada olduğumu düşünüyorum. bizim büyük challenge’ımızın “hugo ödüllü bir kitap” maddesi için seçmiştim. en azından pişman etmedi ve pozitif anlamda da hayli şaşırttı. merağı olanlara tavsiyemdir.

“Seems to be a deep instinct in human beings for making everything compulsory that isn't forbidden.”

Politics and space . . . not a surprise when reading Heinlein. With his writing will always be some very interesting sci-fi space travel, action, etc., but the political allegory is also always there. And, while some authors hide the point they are making under the story, I feel like Heinlein unapologetically puts his right on the surface. Sometimes this has not worked for me (I was not a huge fan of Stranger in a Strange Land), but with The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, I found the balance perfect; not only was I entertained by the sci-fi, but it made me think without feeling like I was being preached at (too much).

But as you can see with the quote below . . . as I said . . . it is right there on the surface!

“A rational anarchist believes that concepts such as "state" and "society" and "government" have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. He believes that it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame. . . as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else. But being rational, he knows that not all individuals hold his evaluations, so he tries to live perfectly in an imperfect world. . . aware that his effort will be less than perfect yet undismayed by self-knowledge of self-failure.”

If you like just straight up action sci-fi to mainly escape with for a while, Heinlein may not be for you. But if you are a fan of a bit of political introspection in the midst of your Artificial Intelligence and laser battles, this book is worth trying.

3'5 / 5

Me siento un poco mal dándole una nota tan "baja". Es un libro que posiblemente merezca más, pero no he conectado con él.
Con los personajes, aunque me hayan gustado y me hayan parecido simpáticos, divertidos, interesantes, etc., no he podido empatizar ni conectar.
La trama es muy interesante, pero en ningún momento he sentido la crudeza de vivir en la Luna, ni la crudeza de la guerra. Pasa todo de una forma en la que no te da tiempo ha saborearlo.

En conclusión, no me ha gustado tanto como esperaba y quería. Quizás no haya sido el mejor momento para leerlo (quién sabe).
Quizás 'El hombre que vendió la luna' dejo una huella tan profunda en mí, que ningún otro libro del autor vaya a superarlo... Quién sabe.

„Смятахме, че човек с фалшив паспорт е на половината път към нас. Пуснахме нареждане надолу по групите във все по-разрастващата се организация — да не приемат хора с истински паспорти.“


Робърт Хайнлайн е един от най-добрите и легендарни майстори в своеобразната изработка на фалшиви паспорти, наречена писане на научна фантастика! Всяка качествена фантастична история неусетно подтиква читателите си към задълбочени размисли, за да погледнат по нов начин и осъзнават по-добре проблемите на човечеството...

С огромно удоволствие препрочетох „Луната е наставница сурова“, който е великолепен и многопластов роман... Големият писател правдоподобно е пренесъл във впечатляваща футуристична среда на Луната важни общочовешки теми, умело е вплел любопитни либертариански идеи, а и проявил отлично чувство за хумор! Вълнуващите перипетии на Мануел и останалите страхотни персонажи са поднесени по невероятно забавен начин, както и не липсва самоирония... Разбира се, могъщият самоосъзнал се компютър Майк има изключително важна роля в революцията на лунатиците, без чиято помощ нямаше да се получат нещата, както и също е сред забележителните образи в това превъзходно четиво!






„Вероятно забелязах самосъзнанието му почти едновременно със самия него, защото за да имаш такова нещо, трябва да се поупражняваш.“


„Туристите често отбелязват вежливостта на всички лунатици, премълчавайки убеждението си, че един затвор не би трябвало да е толкова цивилизован.“


„Проф извади бележник от чантичката си и взе да драска по него. — Ето дърво от групи по трима. Ако ще решаваме да превземем Луната, бих започнал именно от нашата компания. Някой ще бъде избран за председател. Няма да гласуваме, понеже изборът ще бъде очевиден, иначе не сме подходящите трима.“


„Понякога човек не е наясно със себе си, но при един задълбочен разговор научава на какви позиции стои и защо.“


„— Но ти май не желаеш никакви правила!
— Вярно. Обаче ще приема каквито и да било, които ти смяташ необходими за твоята свобода. Аз съм свободен, независимо какъв порядък цари наоколо. Ако го намирам за търпим — търпя го. Ако е прекалено омразен — нарушавам го. Свободен съм, защото знам, че единствен аз съм морално отговорен за всичко, направено от мен.“


„Бернардо де ла Пас и компютърът имаха нещо общо — детската радост от тайнствените нюанси заради самата игра. Подозирам,… дълго преди да разработи своята политическа философия, докато Майк — какво ли би могла да значи за него човешката свобода? Революцията беше спектакъл, който му даваше възможност да срещне приятели и да се похвали с дарбите си. Майк бе най-суетната машина, която можете да си представите.“


„— Господине — каза той, — преди малко използвахте странна дума, странна поне за мен.
— Хлапетата си отидоха, наричай ме Мани. Коя дума?
— Когато настоя тази… млада дама, Тиш… Тиш да си плати като другите. „Тая-не-става“ или нещо подобно.
— О, tanstaafl. Означава „Безплатен обяд ли — няма такъв“. И действително няма — добавих аз, сочейки му табелата върху отсрещната стена, — иначе тия питиета щяха да струват наполовина. Напомних ѝ, че всичко безплатно по-късно ти коства двойно или за нищо не става.
— Интересна философия.
— Не е философия, а факт. По един или друг начин си заплащаш всичко, което получаваш.“


„Щом бъде дадена веднъж, свободата да облагаш с данъци става неограничена, продължавайки до разруха. Не се шегувах, когато им рекох да бръкнат в собствените си джобове. Може би няма шанс да се отървем от управлението — понякога си мисля, че властта е неизлечима човешка болест. Но сигурно е възможно управленският апарат да бъде държан малък, гладен и безобиден. Е, ти виждаш ли по-хубав начин за това от принудата самите конгресмени да погасяват разходите за своето антиобществено хоби?“


„Чух Проф да казва отдавна, в юношеството ми:
— Мануел, когато се изправяш пред проблем, който не разбираш, разнищвай понятните за тебе части от него, после пак го огледай.
Бе ме обучавал на неща, дето и той не схващаше кой знае колко — да речем, математиката, но ме научи и на много по-важен акъл, на основен принцип.“