Red Planet - Blue Pencil
Explanatory Note
In 1949 Robert Heinlein submitted a juvenile called ‘Red Planet’ to
Scribners.
They published it only after many cuts and changes in the plot and this
is
the version referred to as the 1949 edition in this article.
After Heinlein’s death the book as Heinlein originally submitted it,
with
no cuts or alterations, was printed by Del Rey. This is referred to as
the
restored edition in this article.
Additional text found only in the restored book is shown in italics.
Additional
text found in the 1949 publication but not the restored book is
enclosed
in [brackets]. Where text in the 1949 publication was in italics and
need
to be referred to for purposes of comparison, it is shown in UPPER CASE
to
avoid confusion. When a page reference is given, the first page number
refers
to the restored edition, the second to the 1949 book.
Introduction
It is entirely appropriate that the first altered text in Red Planet
was
the phrase, “Shut up.” When Heinlein was forced by editorial pressure
to
make changes in his 1949 juvenile he was indeed silenced and the thrust
of
his message blunted and warped. As he phrased it in a letter to Alice
Dalgleish,
one of Scribner’s editors,
‘I have made great effort to remove my viewpoint from the book and to
incorporate
yours, convincingly - but in so doing I have been writing from reasons
of
economic necessity something that I do not believe. I do not like
having
to do that.’ (1)
This should, incidentally, serve as a caution to those who insist on
interpreting
Heinlein’s personal beliefs from his fiction…. it is not always a
reliable
source.
Young readers a half century later, who will in all probability be
reading
the restored edition, complete with all its additional text, should
find
little in its pages to shock them, nor would they perhaps appreciate
how
galling it was for Heinlein to make the changes that resulted in the
original
publication. They will simply enjoy the story, smile at Willis’s antics
and
be thrilled by Jim and Frank’s adventures as they race across a planet
to
save their families from bureaucratic treachery and the hardships of a
Martian
winter.
So what difference do the changes make? A word for word comparison of
the
two texts reveals changes in every chapter, some major, covering
significant
plot and philosophical areas, some minor, yet cumulative, as slang and
‘inappropriate’
concepts are tidied away. Perhaps the most puzzling editing comes in
the
deletion of dozens of single, innocuous words and phrases which, when
reinstated,
give the text more depth of detail. Unless text length was a burning
issue
it is difficult to understand why these particular changes were made.
It is possible to identify several major areas targeted or affected by
the
editing; the characters of Jim Marlowe and Dr MacRae, the sub plot
concerning
the sex of Willis, the historical and philosophical rationale behind
the
gun laws on Mars, the use of contemporary slang and the sometimes
significant
deletion of single words or phrases. To a certain extent, these areas
both
overlap and impinge on one another; for example the changes in the way
gun
ownership is treated result in two very different portrayals of Jim
Marlowe.
So, why were the changes made at all? It is difficult to judge if Alice
Dalgleish
was tailoring the book to suit the sensibilities of the library list
out
of the knowledge that it would otherwise be rejected, or applying her
own,
rather narrow, standards to the story and finding it lacking. A little
of
both perhaps. The end of the 1940’s was still a time when writing for
children
was hedged about with many restrictions; it would be at least two more
decades
before the rigid distinctions between fiction intended for children and
that
aimed at adults were eased. During the discussions of the changes
needed
in ‘Red Planet’, Heinlein pointed out to Miss Dalgleish that the
content
of the Scribner adult catalogue contained much that would conceivably
shock
to a young reader, turning 18 who had previously been,‘…sealed in
cellophane,
sterile in vitro,’ (2)
and then exposed to the full gamut of adult reading.
As one book about girl’s fiction from 1839 to 1975 puts it,
‘Of all biological phases, adolescence surely is the one in which
bodily
experiences are of paramount importance; yet for reasons of convention,
squeamishness,
and the idea that their audience was in need of moral guidance at every
level,
children’s authors until recently have been prohibited from mentioning
many
of its most fundamental aspects.’ (3)
This is certainly borne out in the 1949 publication, where Jim is
unable
to advise his mother, as he does in the restored edition, that,‘“ Uh,
there’s a toilet right across the hall,”’ when he takes her to
his old room at the school to rest.
It is also useful to consider the position of ‘Red Planet’ within
the
body of Heinlein’s work. It was his third juvenile, following closely
on
the heels of ‘Rocket Ship Galileo’ (1947) and ‘Space Cadet’ (1948) but
it
represents a significant shift in approach in a few short years.
‘Rocket
Ship Galileo’ has its fans but most would consider it to be somewhat
lacking
in originality and rather formulaic. ‘Space Cadet’ had livelier
characters
but was still based around a familiar plot: the training of young men
in
a military organization. ‘Red Planet’ on the other hand was different;
an
attempt to depict a whole new way of life on a strange planet complete
with
mysterious aliens but written in such a way that the reader feels at
home
almost at once. Heinlein had found his balance, targeted his audience
and
was all set to produce some of the most memorable works in his oeuvre.
Language
The sanitized conversation of the 1949 publication does have both
positive
and negative effects; it detracts from the colourful personality of the
Doctor
and it makes Jim and Frank seem unnaturally polite at times but it does
mean
that the 1949 publication seems less old fashioned than the restored
book.
Nothing dates as fast as colloquialisms and some of the expressions the
two
boys use in the restored edition have a quaint tang to them. Perhaps in
this
area, the editor unwittingly did the book a service. That said, the
prissiness
that alters ‘bellyache’ to ‘tummy ache’ and ‘deuce’ to ‘dickens’ tends
to
grate when one considers the intended audience of teenage boys, not
renowned
for the purity of their language!
Some of the humour is lost too; Phyllis, Jim’s sister, is a marginal
character
in both books but in the restored edition she seems less two
dimensional;
akin to other young, independent Heinlein females with irritating
brothers.
Part of the excised dialogue between the siblings is so realistic that
it
is a pity to lose it:
‘Phyllis said, “ Take the charges out of your gun, Jimmy, and let me
practice
with it.”
“You’re too young for a gun.”
“Pooh! I can outshoot you.” This was very nearly true and not to be
borne;
Phyllis was two years younger than Jim and female besides.
“Girls are just target shooters. If you saw a water- seeker, you’d
scream.”
“I would, huh? We’ll go hunting together and I’ll bet you two credits
that
I score first.”
“You haven’t got two credits.”
“I have, too.”
“Then how was it you couldn’t lend me a half credit yesterday?”
Phyllis changed the subject.’ P12/P15.
The alterations of dialogue do not just affect the two boys or their
friends;
Doctor MacRae is censored even more than they are. This is because he
tends
to use a very idiomatic style of speech; for instance when he wants to
advise
Kelly, waiting at the school, that it is safe to emerge he says,‘“Okay.
You - “ MacRae grabbed one of his squad by the arm. “- tear back
and tell Kelly that allee allee out’s in free.”’
This reference to a children’s game was evidently deemed too obscure
for
readers. He also uses the phrase ‘“little red schoolhouse”’, when he is
alerting
Dr Rawlings to the hostage situation at the school. This is a reference
to
the single room schoolhouses common in nineteenth century America;
perhaps
this was altered to simply, ‘school house’ for the sake of overseas
readers.
In his case the slang adds an aura of antiquity to his personality,
something
that may be of significance in the restored book where his lifespan
seems
longer than his appearance warrants. The doctor is fond of blunt
speech,
and uses the one expletive of the book, deleted, naturally, in the 1949
publication,
‘“ The Company hates the expense of moving us, but more important they
are
bloody anxious to move more immigrants in here faster than we can take
them;
they think they see a cheap way out by keeping North and South Colony
filled
up all the time, instead of building more buildings.”’ P 145/P
130.
His scathing denunciation of Gibbs is likewise diluted,
‘“ I might mention in passing [add] that I was a man grown when this
Gibbs
party was still wetting his diapers [drooling on his bib] -”’
Yet it is clear that he is an educated man; his speech has an almost
theatrical
sound to it at times, as if he is, as James Gifford comments in his
recent
book on Robert Heinlein,‘…a virtual caricature of the crusty old
frontier doctor.’ (4)
There is also a tendency to confine the references of the 1949 book to
those
that would be familiar to young readers, understandable from one
perspective
but limiting in educational value. For instance, when Smitty discusses
the
terms of his loan to the boys, a reference to Shakespeare’s Shylock is
deleted
from the original edition,
‘“I’ll have both of yours, on one I.O.U., at six per cent - per month.
The
security will be the pound of flesh nearest your heart.”’
Was it really thought that the readers would not pick up the allusion?
In
a similar way there is an amendment of Doctor MacRae’s praise of
Frank’s
idea about using the Martians to help them,
‘“It just might work. It’s worth a whirl. That notion of making use of
Martian
immunity is positively Machiavellian [brilliant], Frank; you should go
into
politics.”’
Heinlein preferred not to talk down to his readers; these changes must
have
irritated him.
In considering the deletion of individual words, it is interesting to
see
how much of a difference the small changes can make. For instance,
during
the negotiations between Mr Marlowe and Beecher we are told
that,‘Beecher seemed excessively pleased with himself.’
The inclusion of ‘excessively’ gives us a clearer picture of Beecher as
somewhat
unbalanced; he is gloating rather than simply satisfied that the plans
of
the colonists are not going well.
Similarly, when Frank is defending his career choice of rocket pilot to
Doctor
MacRae, he says,‘“ Why not?’ Francis answered doggedly. “I might make
it.”’
The extra word, ‘doggedly’ adds much emphasis; we can see that Frank is
truly
determined, even in the face of disapproval from a respected mentor.
This
makes his actions in leaving the school to warn the colony and thereby
risking
that career even more laudable.
We also lose much that hints, however faintly, of a criticism of
authority,
be it parental or scholastic. When Jim invites Frank and the doctor for
dinner
at the start of the book, Frank declines on the grounds that his mother
thinks
he spends too much time at Jim’s house. The doctor replies,
‘“My mother, if she were here, would undoubtedly say the same thing,”
admitted
the doctor. ”Fortunately I am free of her restraining influence. Call
your
mother, Jim.”’
Later, when the boys are at school and are discussing Howe’s sweeping
changes
in the school routine, they are told by a cynical older boy,
‘“Get wise to yourself kid. A man wouldn’t go into school teaching if
he
didn’t enjoy exercising cheap authority. It’s the natural profession of
little
Napoleon’s.”
“Stoobie wasn’t like that!”
“Stoobie was an exception. Most of them like rules just for the sake of
rules.
It’s a fact of nature, like frost at sundown. You have to get used to
it.”’
P 50 / P 47.
It is not just words like ‘stinker’ that are targeted in the 1949
edition
(deleted at least three times from descriptions of Howe) but anything
that
hints even faintly at sex, including a change in the clothing habits of
the
colonists.
At the start of the book we are given a description of the Doctor from
Willis’s
point of view,
‘The Mars creature saw an elderly male Earthman almost completely
covered
with wiry grey-and-white hair. The hair was thin on top, thick on chin
and
cheeks, moderately thick to sparse on chest and arms and back and legs.
The
middle portion of this strange, unMartian creature was concealed in
snow-white
shorts [and shirt].’
Notice that although in the restored edition Jim is described as being
appropriately
clad for indoors in bright red jockey shorts, the Doctor in the 1949
publication
wears a shirt.
The Doctor accompanies Jim home for dinner and we are given a further
hint
that clothing indoors on Mars is slightly skimpier than on Earth,
‘Jim’s mother met them: Doctor MacRae bowed [.] a bow made no less
courtly
by bare feet and a grizzled, hairy chest.’
After he engages in some mild flirtation,
‘Jim’s mother blushed. She was wearing a costume that a terrestrial
lady
might choose for sunbathing or gardening and was a very pretty sight,
although
Jim was certainly not aware of it.’
Heinlein’s attempts to show that in a climate controlled environment
Earth
style clothing is unnecessary are weakened by restricting this freedom
to
the youngsters. It is a point he makes in other stories, written for an
older
audience; there are references in “The Black Pits of Luna” to moonsuits
that,
‘show an awful lot of skin.’ (5) In “It’s Great To Be Back” such suits
are
described as, ‘six ounces of nylon’ (6). This speculative extrapolation
of
future fashions was evidently seen as too daring in 1949.
Guns and Oaths
One of the most significant changes in the book, possibly the one that
irked
Heinlein the most, occurs during the dinner visit of Dr MacRae, when we
are
told a little about the way weapons are regulated on Mars. In the
version
that was published first, Jim leaves his gun where his baby brother can
get
it and is reprimanded by his father. Much emphasis is put on Jim’s
failure
to live up to the oath he took in front of a Council when he was
permitted
to be a licensed gun owner. We are told that his father,
[‘“guaranteed that you would obey the regulations and follow the code,
wholeheartedly
and all the time - not just most of the time.”’]
This has echoes of the Scouting oath and is intended, at Miss
Dalgleish’s
insistence, to present a picture of a society where the owning of
weapons
is controlled and subject to approval from a governing body.
To Heinlein this was anathema. He roundly informed Miss Dalgleish in a
letter
that, in his opinion, the right to bear arms is the basis of all human
freedom;
a remark that he later puts into Jim’s mouth, as a quotation from Dr
MacRae.
He was also opposed to the licensing of guns and disliked the fact
that,
in order to make the book suitable for publication he had to,
‘Build up the licensing into a complicated ritual, involving codes,
oaths,
etc. - a complete reversal of evaluation.’ (7)
In the restored edition there is still a form of licensing; when
Phyllis
asks to be allowed a gun of her own, her father suggests that Mrs
Marlowe
take her to city hall to be licensed. The difference is that the
necessity
for such licensing is not approved of by Mr Marlowe and is attacked
strongly
by Dr MacRae,
‘“Sir, it is not the natural limitations of this globe that I object
to;
it is the pantywaist nincompoops who rule it- these ridiculous
regulations
offend me. That a free citizen should have to go before a committee,
hat
in hand, and pray for permission to bear arms - fantastic! Arm your
daughter,
sir, and pay no attention to petty bureaucrats.”
Jim’s father stirred his coffee. “I’m tempted to. I really don’t know
why
the Company set up such rules in the first place.”’ P13 restored
edition.
In the 1949 publication, Phyllis is never shown to be a gun user,
neither
is her mother, although one of the reasons she gives for wanting a gun
is
to be able to help her mother by taking on the duty of protecting her
younger
brother when he plays outside; the Martian fauna containing some
dangers.
Later in the story, when the colonists are trapped inside the school we
are
told that,
‘Men and women, boys and girls, t[T]he colony listed hundreds of
licensed
gun wearers - and yet a handful of gun fighters outside, as few as two,
could
keep them holed up.’
Notice how the reference to an entire colony of armed citizens is
deleted;
the implication being that such a widespread gun ownership was not an
acceptable
part of a story for teenagers.
The Journey of James Marlowe
The character of Jim, or rather its development, is drastically
affected
by the cuts. In the 1949 publication he and Frank are quite similar.
Jim
tends to be more likely to speak without thinking, as he does when he
defends
his home and family against Howe’s disparaging comments but generally,
when
Willis is not involved, he and Frank are much alike. In the restored
edition
Jim initially takes on a far more aggressive personality, in sharp
contrast
to Frank’s more sensible and pragmatic attitude. This cannot be simply
put
down to gun ownership by someone too young to be responsible; in both
versions
Jim has a weapon and has been trained in how to use it, in both stories
we
see him firing it at water seekers and at a sniper. The difference is
that
in the restored edition Jim seems to have no qualms about threatening
to
use his gun whenever he perceives there to be a danger to himself or
Willis.
The undeniable fact that in most, if not all, of the cases, using his
weapon
would increase rather than decrease the problem or danger makes this
reaction
seem immature, even foolhardy.
The reason for having an apparently flawed hero is of course to provide
an
object lesson. It is a common theme in a Heinlein juvenile to have the
hero
learn and grow from the events he experiences during the course of the
book.
In Jim’s case he is apparently only given a short time in which to
mature;
the period from Howe’s confiscation of Willis to the end of the book is
a
scant thirteen days. Heinlein manages to sidestep this potential
weakness
in the plot by making those days count by cramming them with hardship
and
difficult decisions and with the interlude in which Jim watches months
and
months of Willis’s memories. This strange vision or trance enables Jim
to
evaluate a long period of time in a few short hours. It is a pivotal
event
in the changes in his personality, changes that can perhaps be mapped
by
his various reactions to the idea of losing Willis. Jim still has
moments
of impetuousness but this experience seems to begin the process of
stabilizing
his emotional responses.
At the start of the book no amount of well meaning advice from friends
or
family will persuade him to let Willis hibernate or remain in familiar
surroundings.
He reacts emotionally to the temporary loss of Willis in the school;
tears
pouring down his face as he vows vengeance on Howe. Later, when he and
Frank
are resting with the Martians and Gekko tells him that Willis cannot be
returned
to him he goes on a disruptive rampage through the building, searching
for
his friend,
‘Jim would no more have disturbed a Martian in a trance, ordinarily,
than
an American western frontier child would have teased a grizzly - but he
was
in no shape to care or notice; he shouted in there, too, thereby
causing
an unheard-of and unthinkable disturbance. The least response was
violent
trembling; one poor creature was so disturbed that he lifted abruptly
all
of his legs and fell to the floor.’ P 114/ P 102.
When Gekko manages to catch up with Jim he picks him up
and holds him like a child and it is as a child that Jim responds,
‘Jim sobbed and beat on the Martian’s hard thorax with both his fists.
Gekko
endured it for a moment, then wrapped a third palm flap around Jim’s
arms,
securing him. Jim looked wildly up at him. “Willis,” he said in his own
language,
“I want Willis. You’ve got no right!”’
The 1949 publication lacks a description of Jim’s reaction
to the loss of Willis at the end of the story. The doctor remarks that
he
is going to break the news to Jim and Mr Marlowe replies that Jim won’t
like
it. In the restored book we are actually shown Jim’s reaction and see
that
he has mellowed considerably,
‘Jim took it well. He accepted MacRae’s much expurgated explanation and
nodded.
“I guess if Willis has to hibernate, well, that’s that. When they come
for
him, I won’t make any fuss. It’s just that Howe and Beecher didn’t have
any
RIGHT to take him.”’
To fully appreciate the growth in Jim that allows him to be so
reasonable
at the end of the story, it is necessary to examine his earlier actions
in
the restored book. The 1949 publication deletes or waters down Jim’s
aggressive
responses and the changes in his personality are lacking. The Jim we
meet
at the start of the book is little different than the one at the end.
The
restored book benefits from the inclusion of the incidents because they
provide
a benchmark against which Jim’s emotional growth can be measured.
The changes begin at the point where he and Frank leave for their new
school.
The journey is broken at Cynia where they meet up with a Martian,
Gekko,
who picks up Willis. The Martian was meditating so the boys carefully
stepped
round him; Willis then attracted his attention by rubbing against his
legs
and letting out some ‘mournful croaks’; probably an attempt to
communicate
in Martian. What he said is not translated but it may even have been a
request
to be picked up. The Martian emerged from his trance, bent down and
scooped
up Willis. Jim reacts strongly to this fairly innocent action in the
restored
book,
‘“Tell him to put Willis down! Or, so help me, I’ll burn his legs off!”
“Oh, now, Jim, you wouldn’t do anything like THAT. It would get your
whole
family in trouble.”
“If he hurts Willis, I sure will!”
“Grow up [Relax]. Martians never hurt anybody.”’
Throughout the book much is made of the fact that the Martians are
sacrosanct;
Jim and Frank even use this as a way of resolving the siege at the end
of
the story.
‘Every human who set foot on Mars had it thoroughly drummed into him
that
the natives must not be interfered with, provoked, nor their customs
violated
- nor, above all things, hurt.’
Jim knows this, has been brought up with it and yet he is prepared to
break
the taboo simply because Willis has been picked up, possibly at his own
request.
His instinctive reaction is to use his weapon to protect his friend; we
do
not know if he would have carried through his threat but that he made
it
at all is indicative both of his impetuous nature and the degree to
which
he feels responsible for Willis.
When Frank manages to communicate with the Martian, Jim is picked up
and
carried towards the city with Willis. He again wants to reach for his
gun,
but is physically too tangled up to do so,
‘He cradled Willis in one arm; his other two arms came snaking down
suddenly
and enclosed Jim, one palm flap cradling him where he sat down, the
other
slapping him across the belly. Jim was unable to get to his gun, which
was
just as well.’
Yet, moments later, after gazing into the Martian’s eyes, Jim is
overwhelmed
by a feeling of trust and friendship. This sudden change in attitude is
underlined
by Jim’s physical reaction to the Martian’s odour,
‘Worse, the little supercharger on the top of Jim’s mask compressed not
only
the thin air, but also he body odor of the native; the stench was
overpowering.’
Strong words and ones that Frank evidently agrees with; when he is
picked
up a few moments later he says, rather rudely,
‘“Judas- what a smell! Pew!”’
However by this time, the Martian has managed to calm Jim down to such
an
extent that not only is he no longer bothered by the,‘stink of his
kind’, he has already forgotten that he ever was bothered: ‘“Smell?
Don’t be a sissy. He smells better than you do.”’
This part of the book was probably deleted for the same reason that
three
references to Howe being a “stinker” are deleted; it was perhaps felt
to
be in bad taste. Yet the deletion costs us not only a significant hint
about
the mental powers of the Martians but also a link to the 1956 book,
Double
Star in which Lorenzo Smythe has a similar reaction to the smell of
Martians,
cured in his case by hypnosis.
The demonstration of Gekko’s control is impressive. All of Jim’s
hostility
drains away in moments. It could also provide an explanation of his
excessively
protective feelings about Willis, a younger Martian but with talents of
his
own. This nuance is missing in the book as it first appeared. It could
be
argued that it is interaction with the Martians that speeds up Jim’s
maturation
rather than the actual adventures he and Frank experience. Certainly
Gekko
and the water sharing experiences play their part in opening Jim’s eyes
to
feelings which he would normally have buried and ignored. During the
first
water sharing alone he changes his attitude quite radically.
‘He was acutely aware of the presence of the Martians, of each
individual
Martian, and was becoming even more aware of them with each drifting
minute.
He had never noticed before how beautiful they were. “Ugly as a native”
was
a common phrase with the colonials; Jim recalled with surprise that he
had
even used it himself, and wondered why he ever had done so.
He was aware, too, of Frank beside him and thought about how much he
liked
him. Staunch - that was the word for Frank, a good man to have at your
back.
He wondered why he had never told Frank that he liked him.’ P 35 / P 34.
After the “growing together” ceremony with their new friends, the boys
resume
their journey to school. The arrival of Mr Howe, the new headmaster is
the
cause of much disturbance as he makes sweeping changes in the way the
school
is organized. After he discovers and confiscates Willis, he makes the
most
significant changes; the abolition, in the original book, of the
Student
Council and the post of student armourer in charge of weapons. Neither
the
council nor the armourer is mentioned in the restored book; this seems
to
be another attempt by the editor to stress that weapons are not readily
available
to the students and are closely monitored. In both books the headmaster
is
to be in charge of all the guns in the future, including those
belonging
to licensed gun owners. Frank thinks that the primary reason for the
change
is that when Mr Howe confiscated Willis, Jim’s reaction was so extreme
that
he feared for his own safety.
‘“There was murder in your eye and he saw it.”’
This is a fair comment; as Howe left their room with Willis, Jim had
tears
streaming down his face. He turned to Frank and said,
‘“ I should have burned him,” he muttered. “I should have burned him
down
where he stood.”
“Suppose you did? Want to spend the rest of your life in an asylum?”
[Frank
went on] Don’t let him get your goat, fellow; if he gets you angry,
you’ll
do something silly and then he’s got you.”’ P 53/ P 50.
Again there is no overt threat to Willis; Jim has dug himself into a
hole
by his insistence that Willis is a free agent and not a pet.
Incidentally,
this is not borne out by the events in the book; Jim seems to treat
Willis
exactly as one would a pet, albeit a pet that can talk. Like John
Thomas
and Lummox in ‘The Star Beast’ the balance of power is ostensibly
weighted
on the side of the human. If he had carried out his threat it is
difficult
to see how the situation would have been improved. Could Jim really
think
that after killing his headmaster he would be allowed to keep Willis?
Next day Jim reads the notice about surrendering weapons and says,
‘“I’m not going to give up my gun. Dad wouldn’t want me to. I’m sure of
that.
Anyhow, I’m licensed and I don’t have to. [I’m a qualified marksman,
I’ve
passed the psycho tests, and I’ve taken the oath; I’m as much entitled
to
wear a gun as he is.]”’ P 54/ P 51.
It has to be remembered here that in the restored edition where Jim
expresses
the wish to shoot Howe, there are no ‘psycho tests’. If there were it
seems
debatable as to whether Jim would have passed them at this point in his
life.
When Jim visits the headmaster to retrieve Willis and send him home,
there
is, in the restored book, a section dealing with Howe trying to get Jim
to
hand over his gun ( hidden by Smitty - for a price) and Jim evading his
questions
in an attempt not to tell an outright lie about where his gun is. Jim
certainly
confirms Howe’s belief that he is dangerous; when Howe accuses him of
lying
(and Jim is lying by omission), he is told,
‘“You know that I have no gun, or you wouldn’t dare say that.”’
The implication seems to be that Jim would have shot Howe for calling
him
a liar.
As Frank and Jim discuss plans for leaving, Jim once again has to be
calmed
down by his clearer headed friend,
‘“I’ll wait until daylight and just walk out. If Howe tries to stop me,
so
help me, I’ll blast him.”
“The idea,” Frank said dryly, “is to get away, not to stir up a gun
battle.
What you want to do is pull a sneak.”’
During all of this melodrama, Frank remains the voice of reason but he
must
be getting a little worried about Jim’s emotional stability. This is
not
to say that Frank is a man of peace but he waits until the true perfidy
of
the non migration plan is exposed by Willis to make a stand,
‘“That fat slug,” Frank said softly, “ I wonder how he would like to
tackle
a winter at Charax? Maybe he’d [HE’D] like to stay inside for eleven or
twelve
months at a time - or go outside when it’s a hundred below. I’d like to
see
him freeze to death - slowly.”’
Frank then goes on to discuss getting the money they need,
‘“We’ll get it out of Smitty.”
“How?”
“We’ll get it. I’ll tear off his arm and beat him over the head with it
if
I have to. Let’s go.”’
Frank’s threats are more rhetorical, whereas Jim’s involve using
a
gun with which he is expert and are thus both more believable and more
dangerous.
At least Jim agrees with Frank that guns were not an option when it
comes
to the scene at the scooter station where the driver leaves without
them.
Jim blames himself for getting out of the scooter to eat but Frank
points
out,
‘“Can you imagine us shooting it out with a couple of innocent
bystanders
and hijacking the scooter? I can’t.”
“Uh - no. I guess you’re right.”’
An interesting comment found in both versions of the book occurs when
the
two boys are with their Martian friends for the second time and Jim is
told
that Willis cannot be returned to him.
‘It is not important that Jim did not have his gun with him; Gekko
could
not inspire the hatred in him that Howe did.’
This seems to imply that Jim needs to know and dislike someone to be
able
to threaten them with his gun but as has been shown this is not really
the
case. Consider his reaction later on in the story when his father, not
fully
comprehending the situation, advises him to surrender. There is no one
present
who could conceivably be considered an enemy or a threat yet,
‘His right hand, almost instinctively, was hovering around the place
where
his holster ordinarily hung.’
His father, if he had noticed this, must have been even more worried a
few
moments later when he tells him of the charges Howe has made against
him
and Jim responds,
‘“I’ll ‘theft’ him! If he ever shows up around me, I’ll burn him down!”
“Jim!”
“Well, I will!”’
Mr Marlowe is obviously taken aback at his son’s attitude but it is
interesting
that when Mr Sutton shows up with Frank a few moments later, he too,
has
a similar reaction to threats,
‘“Pop told them that if they touched me he’d burn their legs off [make
them
sorry]”, Frank said proudly, “and he would too.”
Jim caught his father’s eye. Mr Marlowe looked away.’
The reader is being encouraged to approve of a supportive father, Mr
Sutton,
even though he is, at this point, behaving in a manner that seems far
from
exemplary. One can sympathise with Jim and understand Frank’s pride but
at
the same time feel that perhaps such bellicose threats are an over
reaction.
If the Martians and their mental powers play a significant
part in Jim’s growth it must also be remembered that Jim is accompanied
by
a human role model: his friend, Frank. Frank is the peacemaker, in many
ways
the most rational of the pair. He is the one who constantly reminds Jim
of
the consequences of his actions. It is noticeable that Frank does not
approve
of Jim’s, often wild, threats; at one point he literally wrestles Jim
to
the ground and sits on him in an effort to calm him down. Frank
could
be viewed as a shadowy figure in the book; a sidekick rather than a co
lead
character but in fact he is an example of what Jim needs to become in
order
to be an asset to the colony rather than an immature child. Jim tends
to
model himself on Doctor MacRae, quoting his words and turning to him in
times
of crisis but Frank is in many ways a more suitable mentor. Frank
undergoes
many hardships himself in the course of the book; worry over his mother
if
the migration does not take place, a physically exhausting journey when
he
is ill and yet does not seem to change much. Given his importance in
the
book this can be taken as an indication that he is already on the right
track
and needs no significant alterations in his character.
The combination of Frank’s influence as a peer and a friend and
the
mystical forces used by the Martians serve to divert Jim from his
rather
reckless behavior patterns and onto the road to adulthood. In the
restored
book this is a significant part of the story: in the 1949 publication
it
is not stressed as much due to the deletion of Jim’s aggressive threats.
Dr MacRae, Back Seat Driver or Eminence Grise?
The complex character of Dr MacRae dominates the book, though his
influence
over Frank and Jim seems greater in the restored edition. He is, by
virtue
of his age, the senior member of the colony (some even speculate that
he
is The Senior in disguise…. that theory, enticing though it would
be
to explore, is however outside the scope of this article!) but his
adventurous
attitude, ‘[salty comments and outrageous observations]’ make him both
a
mentor and an ally to the boys. They turn to him, rather than their own
parents,
confide in him, trust him and quote his words constantly throughout the
book.
For example, Jim, in discussing Smitty’s business like approach to
Howe’s
new rules remarks,
‘“He reminds me of something Doc used to say ‘Every law that was ever
written
opened up a new way to graft.’”
“That’s not necessarily so. My old man says Doc’s a crackpot. Come on.”’
This rapport is shown in the opening pages, as he attempts to dissuade
Frank
from his chosen career as rocket pilot, a passage missing from the 1949
publication
that also gives a hint at the difference between the society on Earth
and
that on Mars, paving the way for the later conflict.
‘“See here, Frank, do you really want to live a life bound around with
rules
and regulations and discipline?”
“Mmmm…I want to be a pilot. I know that.”
“On your head be it. Me, I left Earth to get away from all that
nonsense.
Earth has gotten so musclebound with laws that a man can’t breathe. So
far,
there’s still a certain amount of freedom on Mars. When that changes
-”’
P 6 / P 11.
The character of Dr MacRae is a real scene stealer in both books but
in the restored edition he is even more intriguing, rather carelessly
dropping
clues about his past that, if true, would make him practically an Old
One
himself. It is possible that Heinlein was laying the foundations for
the
doctor being a member of the Howard Families and thus tying in his
juvenile
series to the Future History timeline that he had developed. It is
equally
possible that Scribners would have frowned on this link between one of
their
juveniles and ‘Methuselah’s Children’ which at this point had
only
appeared in the ‘pulps’. Miss Dalgleish viewed these early science
fiction
magazines with some scorn as being rather ‘cheap’. (8) Heinlein may
also
have decided that setting all of his stories, especially full-length
books
intended for younger readers, within the Future History framework was
too
restrictive. The different versions of aliens and Earth itself that
occur
in the juveniles would tend to indicate that he preferred them to stand
alone.
The first hint that the Doctor is older than he appeared comes at the
dinner
party with Jim’s family,
‘“Tell me, sir, do you know what television was used for when it first
came
out?’
“No. How would I?”
“ Well, I didn’t see it myself of course, but my father told me about
it.
It seems - “
“ Your FATHER? How old was he? When was he born?”
“My grandfather then. Or it may have been my great grandfather. That’s
beside
the point.”’ P 15/ P 17.
Later when the boys are sent to him to be checked over after their
journey
and they are discussing Jim’s strange experience with the old Martian,
invisible
to Frank, he again lets something slip,
‘“ Sure you did - because seeing takes place in the brain and not in
the
eye. I can close my eyes and ‘see’ the Great Pyramid shimmering in the
desert
heat. I can see the donkeys and hear the porters yelling at the
tourists.
See ‘em? Shucks, I can smell ‘em - but it’s just my memory.”
Jim looked thoughtful but Frank looked incredulous. “Say, Doc, what are
you
talking about? You never saw the Great Pyramid; it was blown up in
World
War III.” Frank was, of course, correct as to his historical facts; the
eastern
allies should never have used the Pyramid of Cheops as a place to store
atomic
bombs.
Dr Macrae looked annoyed. “Can’t you permit a man a figure of speech?”’
P
135/6 / P 121.
He continually uses expressions that stand out as being somewhat old
fashioned
and Heinlein uses this subtly at times to show how far ahead in the
future
Red Planet is set; for example, the doctor is old yet he refers to,
‘“way
back when women wore skirts.”’, as if that change in fashion was long
in
the past. To the modern reader it may seem that this small reference
was
deleted because what is there to marvel at in a woman not wearing a
skirt?
It is more likely that it was deleted in the 1949 publication because
the
widespread fashion for women’s trousers was relatively new. In Britain,
‘ Women took to wearing trousers when working in factories, Civil
Defence
or turning out at night into their air-raid shelters. If the war can be
credited
with producing any fashion in women’s clothes it was the popularizing
of
trousers for women of all ages.’ (9)
It is probable that American women also found that trousers were a
liberating,
useful addition to their wardrobe but this change was viewed with some
horror
by traditionalists who felt that trousers were both unfeminine and
immodest.
Donning a pair of slacks in a story set in the 1940’s was often used as
a
metaphor for a female character shedding inhibitions. Consider for
example
this quotation from a novel set in wartime Britain and written in 1960,
‘ She bought two woolen jerseys and a pair of stout walking-shoes, and
-
most daring and exciting of all - she bought a pair of navy-blue
trousers
and a polo jersey.’ (10)
Later, when she wears the trousers for the first time she discovers
that,
‘The trousers were not as comfortable as she had expected - there was a
strange
flappy feeling about the legs - but whether they were comfortable or
not
she was determined to wear them, for they were symbolic of her new
life.’
(11).
The doctor also has a slightly subversive effect on the boys. He makes
no
bones about encouraging them to deceive their parents in both versions
of
the book. Jim and Frank approach him with a plan for escaping the siege
at
the school and ask what his opinion is, only to be told,
‘“ However, about the other stunt - the garbage can paratrooper act -
if
you ask your father, he’ll veto it.”
“Can’t you ask him? He’ll listen to you.”
“ I said ‘IF you ask your father,’ you idjut. Do I have to wipe your
nose
for you?”’ P 166 / P 148.
In the aftermath of the fight we get another indication of Dr MacRae’s
original
views as he comments that Beecher is clearly paranoid. Dr Rawlings
agrees
and says that Beecher will need to be hospitalized but MacRae has other
ideas,
‘“Certainly, certainly,” agreed Macrae, “but speaking
non-professionally,
I’d rather see the no-good so-and-so hang. Paranoia is a disorder only
contracted
by those of fundamentally bad character.”
“Now, Doctor,” protested Rawlings.
“That’s my opinion,” insisted MacRae and I’ve seen a lot of cases, in
and
out of hospital.”’ P 183 restored edition.
It is somewhat amusing that in the 1949 publication this section is
replaced
by an attempt by Mr Marlowe to get MacRae to take over the
headmastership
of the school until a replacement for Howe can be appointed. The
suitability
of MacRae for such a position is debatable but it’s a moot point; he
refuses
vehemently and we lose the chance to see him in control of the school,
a
situation which might have had far longer lasting effects on the pupils
than
Howe’s petty restrictions.
Mama Willis?
Another major revision in the plot, linked again to what seems
excessive
prudery on the part of the editors, occurs when the boys are
recuperating
with the Martians and wake up to discover that Willis has apparently
laid
eggs during the night. This entire sub plot was excised from the 1949
publication,
much to the detriment of the story. The fact that Willis has done
something
extraordinary makes the Martians’ anger at those who would harm him
more
believable. Without it we never really appreciate why he is important
though
both versions speculate that he is a baby Martian, a caterpillar to
their
butterfly. We are given a clear picture of the imperturbable Martians,
who
wait long minutes before speaking, being jarred out of their normally
calm
behaviour,
‘Neither of the boys had ever seen a Martian hurry before, nor show any
signs
of excitement. Gekko let out a deep snort and left the room at once, to
return
promptly with as many companions as could crowd into the room. They all
talked
at once and paid no attention to the boys.’
The story closes with the deaths, one could say the executions, of
Beecher
and Howe and the tense negotiations between the Martians and the
colonists,
represented by the ubiquitous Doctor, which end with a tenuous peace
between
the two races. In the restored edition we also get confirmation that
Willis
is not all he seems,
‘“That’s the trouble. It’s very complicated and I don’t know where to
start.
Willis IS important and it does matter that he’s a she.”’
(One wonders incidentally, why it was initially assumed that Willis was
male;
because he used Jim’s voice as his own perhaps?)
We are then told that Willis’s Martian name means, ‘“In whom the hopes
of
a world are joined”’ Mr Marlowe comments,
‘“Sounds like a name for a messiah, not a bouncer”’
It is tempting for readers to make a connection between this comment
and
the plot of ‘Stranger In A Strange Land’ especially as the Martians in
both
books appear to be the same; ‘Red Planet’ though written first is of
course
set later than the events of ‘Stranger’.
Conclusion
Red Planet is one of four Heinlein books reissued in a restored form.
The
reasons for the editing are not the same in each case and each version
has
its fans and critics. ‘Podkayne of Mars’ has perhaps the least amount
of
new or changed words but the alteration of the ending has a profound
effect
on the rest of the book. ‘Stranger In A Strange Land’ is unchanged as
far
as plot goes but is enriched (or encumbered) by hundreds of tiny
additions
to the text. Perhaps the most similar case to ‘Red Planet’ is ‘The
Puppet
Masters’ which, although unquestionably an adult book was divested of
much
of its darker and more adult themes. The difference is that the cuts
were
made in an effort to create a book that was more suitable for
serialization
in a magazine: length, rather than content was the primary factor.
Certainly
Heinlein was willing to make those changes as they did not result in a
book
that endorsed views contrary to his own.
It is partly because ‘Red Planet’ as it first appeared was not written
the
way that Heinlein wanted it to be written that the restored edition is
more
valuable to a Heinlein reader who also enjoys the sometimes dangerous,
always
exhilarating, hobby of analyzing the stories. There is less point in
analyzing
the 1949 book; it was so altered that Heinlein seriously put forward
the
suggestion that Miss Dalgleish should be named as a co-author. That is
not
to say that the 1949 publication has no merits but weighed against the
loss
of Heinlein’s intended message it cannot be viewed as superior or
preferable.
The reader may not endorse the message but it is authentic Heinlein,
not
watered down or twisted Heinlein. If we are to have a target to aim at,
let
it be a valid one. It is also weakened by the lack of emphasis on Jim’s
growth
and the references to the importance of Willis as a hope for the
future.
What then is the message or theme of ‘Red Planet’? It seems to be an
exploration
of a frontier society and the need for a return to the values of the
past
which served America so well as the vast land was tamed. Echoes of even
more
distant history are evoked in the tension between the Earth based
Company
and the Mars based colony, resolved once more in favour of the
colonists
and their fight for independence.
It is interesting to note several passing references in the book which
link
the Martian colony to America’s past. For instance, when Jim disturbs
meditating
Martians, this is described as being akin to an American child of the
frontier
taunting a grizzly. I have mentioned Doctor MacRae’s use of the term,
‘little
red schoolhouse.’ Earlier in the book, when MacRae and Marlowe are
discussing
gun licensing, the Doctor also mutters,
‘something that combined ‘Danegeld’ and the ‘Boston Tea Party’ in the
same
breath.’
On a less serious note, when Phyllis asks for an explanation
of the term, ‘folk dancing’, the Doctor mentions an important tradition
of
the pioneering families,
‘“ These kids are missing something. I think I’ll organize a
square-dancing
club. I used to be a pretty good caller, once upon a time.”’
When the colonists meet to discuss the recording that
Willis has made about the migration, Doctor MacRae makes a direct link
between
the situation in which the colonists find themselves and that of the
Americans
before the War of Independence,
‘“The question is not whether or not we can last out a polar winter;
the
Eskimo caretakers do that every season. It isn’t just a matter of
contract;
it’s a matter of whether we are going to be free men, or are we going
to
let our decisions be made for us on another planet, by men who have
never
set foot on Mars!
“Just a minute - let me finish! We are the advance guard.
When the atmosphere project is finished, millions of others will
follow.
Are they going to be ruled by a board of absentee owners on Terra? Is
Mars
to remain a colony of Earth? Now is the time to settle it!”
There was dead silence, then scattered applause. Marlowe said, “ Is
there
more debate?”
Mr Sutton got up. “ Doc has something there. It was never in my blood
to
love absentee landlords.”
Kelly called out, “Right you are, Pat!”’ P 145/ P 130.
Later, Doctor MacRae spells it out again in another impassioned
speech
to the colonists as they debate their options in the school,
‘“ Now as I see it, this is a frontier society and any man old enough
to
fight is a man and must be treated as such - and any girl old enough to
cook
and tend babies is an adult, too. Whether you folks know it yet or not
you
are headed into a period where you’ll have to fight for your rights.
The
youngsters will do most of the fighting; it behooves you to treat them
accordingly.
Twenty-five may be the right age for citizenship in a moribund,
age-ridden
society like that back on Earth, but we aren’t bound to follow customs
that
aren’t appropriate to our needs here.”’ P 158/ P 141
The story ends with Doctor MacRae’s vision for the future a real
possibility
after the negotiations with the Martians and there is a final nod to
history,
‘“Is the Proclamation of Autonomy written? Did the folks go for it?”
“ Yes, it’s written - we cribbed a good deal from the American
Declaration
of Independence I’m afraid, but we wrote one.”
In this milieu, with the dangers from the Martian fauna (and indeed the
Martians
themselves) weapons and a trained, armed citizenry are seen by Heinlein
to
be essential. The changes that were made in the text militated against
this
vision; it is implied that only men were armed and the restrictions
applied
to gun ownership would have been seen as unnecessary by Heinlein. As he
remarked
in a letter to Miss Dalgleish,
‘ I am aware of the dangers of guns, but I do not agree that those
dangers
can be eliminated nor even ameliorated by coercive legislation - and I
think
that my experience entitles me to my opinion at least as much as school
teachers
and librarians are entitled to theirs.’ (12)
And there indeed lies the heart of the matter and the reason to prefer
the
restored edition; we may want to disagree with Heinlein or we may be in
profound
agreement but no matter what our views, we want to apply them to the
story
as written by Heinlein.
Jane Davitt
Return to Home
Send Feedback
REFERENCES
1. ‘Grumbles From The Grave’ P 62
2. ‘Grumbles From The Grave’ P 77
3. ‘ You’re a brick, Angela!’ P 97
4. ‘ Robert A Heinlein A Reader’s Companion P 158
5. ‘ Green Hills Of Earth’ P 63
6. ‘Green Hills Of Earth P 80
7. ‘ Grumbles From The Grave P 62
8. ‘ Grumbles From The Grave’ P 53
9. ‘You’re a brick, Angela!’ P 284
10. ‘ Spring Magic’ P 35
11. ‘Spring Magic’ P 46
12. ‘ Grumbles From The Grave’ P 64
BIBLIOGRAPHY
‘Red Planet’ Robert A Heinlein Victor Gollancz Ltd 1963
‘Red Planet’ Robert A Heinlein Ballantine Books 1990
‘Robert A. Heinlein A Reader’s Companion’ James Gifford. Nitrosyncretic
Press
2000. ISBN 0-967987-1-5
‘Spring Magic’ D. E. Stevenson. Fontana Books 1960.
‘You’re a brick, Angela!’ Mary Cadogan and Patricia Craig. Victor
Gollancz
Ltd 1976 ISBN 0 575 02061 X
‘Grumbles From The Grave’ Robert A. Heinlein edited by Virginia
Heinlein.
A Del Rey Book Ballantine Books December 1990. ISBN 0-345-36941-6
‘The Green Hills Of Earth’ Robert A Heinlein.Pan Books 1956. ISBN 0 330
10679
1
There are two editions of Red Planet referred to in this article. The
original
1949 publication was published by Scribners.The edition I used was
published
in 1967 by Pan Books Ltd 4th printing 1978 ISBN 0 330 107127. The
restored
book is a Del Rey Book published by arrangement with Charles Scribner’s
Sons.
First revised edition January 1990. ISBN 0 345 34039 6.