http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3434

"Brin’s error matters to me personally because, as much as I am anything else, I am one of Heinlein’s children. I have closely studied his works and his life, and that study has shaped me. What I have given to the world through my advocacy of open source is directly tied back to what the Old Man taught me about liberty, transparency, and moral courage. And I am never more Heinlein’s child than when I advocate for an armed (and polite) society."

Brin's piece is at http://torforge.wordpress.com/2010/07/1 ... avid-brin/

OK, what was Brin's error?

"Alas, most of his novels reach a vigorous climax, concluding part one… and then peter out disappointingly in the last half, amid a morass of garrulous talk."

The above was the most incredible statement I found in the article. It sounds like it was written by someone who'd rather watch "Kill Bill" than "12 Angry Men". LOL

Most Heinlein novels reach a radical change in the middle, most often a test of some kind that our hero fails. In the rest of the novel solutions must be found, character must grow.

One must admit, I think, that Heinlein frequently had trouble with endings; one notable exception being Stranger, and there are others. I have always thought that. One of the more disappointing endings was Double Star, though I've seen opinion that it was one of his strongest.

I'm not exactly sure how this ended up being about Double Star, but I have no complaint. As for its ending, it's a postscript to a memoir written 25 years earlier for therapeutic benefit, as is made clear; he doesn't need to write more than perfunctorily about his political career since he became Bonforte; this isn't for any audience but himself.

In any case I'm glad Double Star was included in the new Library of America two-volume set of nine SF novels of the 1950s.