Talk:The Number of the Beast (novel)

message: It is one of the 'Lazarus Long' set of books, involving time travel, parallel dimensions, free love, voluntary incest, and a concept that Heinlein named pantheistic solopsism (I think) - the theory that universes are created by the act of imagining them so that somewhere Oz is real. 
Opinion is divided among science fiction fans as to whether this and other late Heinlein novels are brilliant, creative and original, or simply the wishfulfillment of a man in his second childhood. 
Other books in this set include - To Sail Beyond the Sunset, Methuselah's Children, The Cat Who Walks Through Walls and Time Enough for Love.
:above three paragraphs exact duplicate of another Heinlein novel -- only need to be said once. --Ed Poor
:It's called Pan-Theistic Multi-Ego Solipsism, In short, each man or woman mentally creates their own universe or multiverse, AKA "World as a Myth"
69.207.233.152 (talk) 01:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Observations

message: If so, then I'm a *much* less selective reader than I'd like to think I am.  It's, for example, *much* better than Clancy's Rainbow Six (novel) and The Teeth of the Tiger.--Baylink 17:43, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not saying much, if true. I have never encountered a book that comes anywhere close to being as awful as TNotB. Not even in the same order of magnitude of dreadfulness. Ben-w 00:11, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have read that TNotB was intended to be horrible, in that it was an inside joke by Heinlein effectively demonstrating what NOT to do when writing a novel. See here. JubalHarshaw 18:00, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be more inclined to believe that if (a) he had ever written anything that was any good and (b) if TNotB didn't share so many characteristics with his other novels. Heinlein is the Naked Emperor of science fiction. Ben-w 22:51, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember reading this book back when it first came out. It was given to me as a gift and I was an avid reader of Sci-Fi at the time but when I read it I thought to myself "this is horrible". The style of writing was annoying and cartoonish. I had never read any pulp science fiction so that could be why. All I remember about it now is the characters constantly arguing about nonsense. Stay away from this book. Go read "The moon is a harsh mistress." That book is brilliant; possibly Heinlein's best. Dr. Morbius 23:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "contender...worst novel" 

message: Calling TNotB Heinlein's worst novel is a far cry from Wikipedia's avowed neutrality.  I'm going to modify that sentence to be less, ah, acid.  Plus I'm rather of Zeb & Hilda.  66.61.41.113 22:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snarky bad novel remark 

message: I think Gay deserves a full-character treatment, like the one given to Mycroft Holmes or any other sentient computer. Maybe a link to Gay deceiver (Heinlein) might prompt someone to write her biography. Albmont 03:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No argument here, especially as she appears in all of the World as Myth novels.  She has as much right to her own article as Mike does. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 03:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  could just have a link to the Heinlein Society concordance -- http://www.heinleinsociety.org/concordance/G_HC.htm#gaydeceiver 199.214.19.88 (talk) 19:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay Deceiver 

message: should there be a section to all the direct mentions of other authors univereses and allusions to them?
I know they mention Star Trek, H.P. Lovecroft, the Foundation Novels, (and in a shameless plug) Heinlein's future history series and stranger in a strange land).
He also talks about Clarke's law, (Something like that you should talk to the most "educated" about how something is impossible and then prove them wrong) and mentions that it was from Arthur C. Clarke.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.56.119 (talk) 23:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allusions 

message: I was going to add back a bit deleted in the above revision. I don't see any reason not to undo the entire change:  It makes no real improvement. This novel does seem "connected to" rather than "associated with" <I>TIme Enough for Love</I>; it does "revolve around" rather than "chiefly concern" the continua device; it's both parody and homage to the pulps. The other changes in the revision seem no more correct. Any objections? Patrickbowman (talk) 20:48, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undoing  Revision as of 23:49, November 16, 2009 

message: Working through :Category:Novel has infobox needing 1st edition cover and trying to fix this article; anybody know which cover this article should have  ?
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1451 appears slightly unclear, and http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/h/robert-heinlein/number-of-beast.htm is not that helpful...
Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 16:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Which cover image ?

message: Even with the inline citation, it's still not clear which was written first - - - The Number Of The Beast or The Pursuit Of The Pankera.
The inline citation refers you to an article that states Pankera was written first, but with absolutely no proof !
Is there any way to verify which one was actually written first?
Rather curious. 2600:8800:785:8500:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 13:08, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which was ''actually'' first ? 

message: I thought that guy was after a mammal? 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:956C:1C35:22BF:46F1 (talk) 08:35, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  " like saying Moby Dick is about a one-legged guy trying to catch a fish"