Re: Robert Heinlein

Since Heinlein won more awards both from fans and his peers than any of his contemporaries, the consensus disagrees with you.

Sometimes he is not even a decent storyteller: his first novel, "For Us, The Living", written in the late 1930s was not published until this century. No publisher would buy it when he wrote it. Only his huge fan base, long since established, guaranteed enough of an audience to justify publishing costs for the 21st century.

Spider Robinson, who finished one of the novels that Heinlein did not live long enough to complete ("Variable Star") and who wrote the introduction to "For Us, The Living", freely concedes that it is not a very good story.
Its interest is mainly in revealing the seeds of his writing career.
Almost all of his later works can be found lurking in this story.

Heinlein's politics influenced his writing, which to me seemed to be thinly-disguised essays disguised as stories. His fundamental belief was that government should serve the people, not the other way around. This belief was not new, but it was revolutionary (see the year 1776).
Even the "juveniles" that he wrote for children's publishers contained libertarian ideas designed to inculcate a belief in individual freedom above regimentation.

More than anything else, Heinlein tried to stimulate his audience to think outside of the box and look beyond the status quo.

While "For Us, The Living" was not a very good novel, it is a fascinating book. Let me explain this seeming contradiction: it is not as much a novel as it is a series of thought-provoking essays loosely tied together by a nebulous "plot".
Ignore the "story" and enjoy some controversial and outrageous ideas to stimulate you. It provides plenty of food for thought.

Seamus