DOES THIS WORK?
Kidding. I just finished Starship Troopers, and was favorably impressed compared to the movie. All I had remembered from the movie was a basic action movie set in space. The book was clearly far deeper.
Interestingly enough, there seems to be a large amount of race and gender interplay in Starship Troopers. Females being better pilots stood out from the beginning, and then there were numerous references to women as part of the reason why the M. I. fought. Interesting.
More to come later?
I agree that there was a role for women in the book, but I didn't feel that it was a respected role. They were better pilots, true, but they were nevertheless not allowed any of the grit and honor of the M.I. For all Rico's talk about women, there was not a single female M.I. in the book (unlike in the movie, interestingly). Women in ST are respected, but only as figurines, to be put on a pedestal, to be protected and fought for, but never to fight themselves. Even as pilots, they are protected in their own region of the ship, and not allowed to fraternize with the soldiers. All the mentors that Rico respects and learns from are men. There are more examples, but I can't think of them off the top of my head.
-CZ
P.S. The movie was horrible. Total bastardization of any of the meaning in the book.
I agree that the space ST carves out for women is not thoughtfully constructed and in fact seems willfully unsympathetic.
"Forward of bulkhead thirty was ladies' country" (142)
The book thinks, speaks, exists in the male universe behind bulkhead thirty and is perfectly content merely occasionally to eavesdrop on the titillating whispers that it imagines might be coming from the other side of the divide.
(I also agree RE: CountZero's assessment of the film. )
Women definitely have a different role in the book than men do. However, I think what that role is and whether it is an unsympathetic one is somewhat ambiguous. On the one hand, women clearly are not allowed in MI, whereas men are allowed in the navy. On the other hand, women are strongly preferred as pilots and captains to men (for reasons of ability, not because it is "women's work" or anything like that). Also, as in our military, these positions seem to be very prestigious ones, and certainly a captain is always the highest ranking officer on board her own ship, outranking the (male) infantry commander.
Finally, while the narrator does have a very basic and narrow view of women, that may simply be a result of his chosen profession - he never interacts with any women, and his environment seems designed to encourage him to idealize them. Given his circumstances, it would be pretty surprising if he did have a realistic view of women.
While I definitely had the reaction of "Hark! Women! Gender! Dead ahead!" when I first read about the women as better suited to piloting/captaining ships, this fell away as the novel progressed. What I think is important to take from the book, though, is the hyper-masculinized world the protagonist (Juanito?) finds himself in. There is an interesting roboticizing of men that happens, both in their battle equipment and the constant repetition of the sentiment that it's not okay for MI's to show emotion, that they are just pawns for their commanders and the politicians to maneuver. I'm not quite done with the book yet, and I still haven't fully mulled over my thoughts yet, but I do think there is something to be said about gender in the book if "gender" is not just synonymous for "women" but rather looks at other facets of that word's meaning.
Oh, just on the subject of the main character's name, I think his birth name is "Juan", his nickname is "Johnny", and his mother calls him "Juanito" as a pet name. I think. It's strongly implied that his family is somewhat "whitewashed" but Hispanic in origin.
I think that the term 'whitewashed' does not apply here. Though I admit I imagined Johnny as white, I think that is a result more of my own prejudices and assumptions than in Heinlein's portrayal of him. According to the always-reliable Wikipedia, he's Filipino; regardless, as you point out, his name is clearly an indicator of Hispanic origin.
Heinlein never makes much of an issue of Johnny's race, keeping any references at least suble enough that a first-time reader like me doesn't really notice. Johnny's characterization - aristocratic, educated, and (at least at first) sheltered - calls to mind the English boarding school boy type. At least when operating in stereotypes, he seems more WASP-y than Hispanic. However, I think that this is not an indication of his whitewashed-ness (how's that for a word). Heinlein makes a nod toward the issue of gender with the pilot thing, indicating an awareness of such social politics, but pretty much ignores race, leading me to believe that race has ceased to be an issue on Terra.
Looking at the way Heinlein totally ignores racial issues, I doubt his intent was to create a utopia where we can all 'just get along;' there are just more important things to deal with. Increased globalization of Terra or some other terrestrial social force could have contributed, but I suspect it has more to do with the Bugs. When you've got giant, other-worldly arachnid/insect things that obliterate major cities, differences in skin tone must seem rather unimportant. At least they've got the right number of limbs.
Side note:
I wonder if the producer/director/other decision maker of the movie was able to cast such a ridicuously stereotypical blond-haired, strong-jawed all-American actor as a character named 'Juan Rico' with a straight face.
I have to take issue with your statement that "Heinlein totally ignores racial issues." That's just not really true. He doesn't talk a lot about it directly, but he clearly has a lot of ideas about how race relations should look.
For one thing, the book makes the point--hamfistedly--that the MI is "multicultural." Toward this end, races and cultures tend to get represented via stereotype. See Shujumi the Asian martial arts expert; "Hassan the Assassin." (To be clear, I am not saying that the book is "racist." It might well be, but that's not an argument I'm interested in making.)
In the end, I think you're right to say that "race has ceased to be an issue," but it might be interesting to consider why it's no longer an issue. In the multicultural MI, all Heinlein's stereotypes coexist harmoniously. Heinlein has very clear ideas about how this end is reached, and it's not simply that "there are more important things."
If, as Prof. Fitzpatrick suggested, Stark Trek observes a UN model of cultural interaction, ST is committed to the distinctly American "melting pot" myth, wherein the goal of the system is gradually to pare down uncomfortable difference.
The Federation is supposed to be a model of assimilation:
Of the Catholic Priest Migliaccio--"Moslems, Christians, Jews, whoever wanted a word with him before a drop, he was there" (4);
Sergeant Zim--"That's okay, lot's of 'em didn't speak much [English] when they get here--I didn't myself. Tell Meyer not to worry, he'll pick it up" (45);
Etc.
If race isn't an issue, it's because Heinlein thinks that, eventually, we will "get past race" via assimilation. (This is not a model of race relations that I would endorse.) This is a claim that he makes pretty vigorously; he doesn't just ignore the issue.
Okay, yeah, you're totally right about my 'Heinlein totally ignores racial issues' quote. I don't know why I wrote that, because I know I don't think that. Damn keyboard, life of its own. However, some of the evidence you provide is more indicative of cultural assimilation rather than racial. Shujumi and Hassan do seem somewhat racially stereotyped, but differences in language and religion do not necessarily follow racial lines. Someone from Germany or France would not necessarily speak English, or could be Muslim, but would probably still identify as 'white.' I agree that Heinlein's treatment of ethnic and cultural differences is disturbingly pro-assimilation, but I stick by my assertion that Heinlein largely (though not totally) ignores issues related to the colors of one's skin.
I would argue that, along with Heinlein's tendency to idealize assimilation and colorblindness, the assimilation he portrays seems only skin deep. In one of the overlong speeches, by Mr. Dubois if I recollect, there's a discussion of the ever increasing need for habitable spaces, which suggests that, in remaining a viable species, humanity will always need someone to fight. At the point of the book, it's the Bugs, (and Bug-Human relations may map better onto race relations than any of Heinlein's explicit mentions of race), and perhaps next it will be the Skinnies, but after that, by the book's internal logic, the human race will need to turn inward on itself, and how handy it is that racial lines can be distinguished on sight.
I think Wikipedia's wrong here - I can't find the exact page, but as I recall, Johnny encounters a person who speaks Tagalog in his home country of the Philipines; Johnny comments in response that his family uses a little Spanish slang around the house, but that he doesn't really speak anything other than English.
Also, note that Johnny's mother died in Buenos Aires. (Which, I'm pretty sure the book implies is not where his family normally lives, but might be an ancestral home or something.)
So unless I'm way out of line here (possible), then it's probably someone else's confusion that's claiming Juan is Filipino.
Rico's talking to a guy who is surprised that Rico recognizes something he heard as Tagalog, and Rico says that while they use English for business and such, tradition still holds on the old tongue, implying that he is indeed Filipino. And yeah, in the book, he's not from Buenos Aires. And let's just pretend nobody's from the movie...
Looking through the book a second time, The only times Rico Johnnie etc is named prior to the letter from his mother are in the first chapter, twice, and then the page before the letter form his mother. Reading it, I didn't process him as Johnie because it immediately associated as a generic all-American boy to me, kinda like "Uncle Sam has a stance on lots of things despite existing solely in a poster." I think it's actually very interesting that Rico's first name is so generic, and that he doesn't become Rico until he's seen battle. While several characters are named in boot camp, Rico remains very nameless. I think this both serves to draw in the reader (and might be part of why the military likes the book so), and to highlight the concept of "You are not important as an individual, we are trying to break you of that so you put the good of the group above your own needs." There's also the heavy use of "ape" at boot camp, almost like they aren't quite human enough to warrant individual names?
CZ, I like your point that women in ST are put on a pedestal. I agree with you to a certain point, but I feel that that adds a different role to women, one that is still important. Keep in mind that the book was written before any of the modern women's lib. Heinlen's roles for women seem pretty far ahead of the time if you consider that he wrote pre women's lib. Read in that viewpoint, the fact that women were kept separate and looked on as figures on pedastels doesn't seem as bad as me. Women didn't fight in the M.I. true, but they were in dangerous roles as pilots, and gave the men something to fight for. (Again, a pre women's lib idea. Empowering for the time?)
Rico joined the federal services for a woman, following her in. While that doesn't say much for his character, I think that you can read into Carmen in this situation. A woman is leading a man into his destiny. Again, pre women's lib, but still impressive for the time.
P.S.
I enjoyed the movie, but definitely had only tenuous at best connections with the book. Absolutely ruined the gender and racial overtones.
As much as women were "on a pedestal" in the book, which I would agree with, it seemed odd that they were mentioned in short spurts, and then would not come up for a while. Probably the longest example would be Johnnie's time at Camp Currie, where (I may be forgetting) there isn't really much mention at all about the opposite gender. It may have come up once, but didn't take up more than a page or two...
And I also wondered a bit why Johnnie himself didn't seem to relate to them much. His only obvious attempts were with Carmencita a bit, who popped up only once later and then seemed not to exist anymore, and the lady in Sanctuary, who remained nameless.
Its almost as if they are being portrayed as "on a pedestal" out of reach of the MI, in particular Johnnie....but otherwise are mostly forgotten in the business of war. Which in hindsight, seems odd when the men are fighting to protect said ladies.
I'm not really sure that Heinlein was trying to make an explicit statement of gender here. the book is fundamentally masculine; that is to say, as noted above, it's from the point of view of a male who is essentially, by virtue of his chosen profession, isolated entirely from women. consider also that he did this at the age of eighteen; it's easy to imagine that in the strange circumstances he's in, he'd develop some odd thoughts about women. As to the issue of respect, although we identify with the MI because our narrator, in reality a starship captain is going to be more respected than a ground pounder. this is true today, and in the setting Heinlein presents a starship captain requires agility, reflexes, and high-level education in mathematics and physics above and beyond that required of modern ship captains; these are impressive women, who wield considerably more destructive power and political prestige than the (largely?) male MI commanders.
You're exactly right Paracelsus: Rico was made an MI because he was underqualified, while the smarter and more motivated Carmen got to be a pilot, the role Rico wanted in the first place. I think it's interesting how the movie makes Dizzy a more badass infantrywoman than her peers, and there's this weird struggle for Johnny's attention between the more effeminate/vulnerable but also more intelligent Carmen and the tomboy Dizzy who Johnny ends up admiring as a peer rather than a feminine object to be protected.
Also when it comes to moving around in a suit of power armor and lifting/controlling heavy weaponry, I think I will only offend the most outrageous by saying that men have an easier time building muscle mass and would be able to move with greater ease.
I don't believe that Heinlein was making any explicit commentary on gender roles. The novel was written at the close of a decade that had virtually no positive space for women, especially in the form of a military novel. The military is a group that was designed for men and remains mostly exclusive to men. I was in fact surprised that Heinlein described women as the superior pilots. This book does not have room for strong female characters because in the traditional sense, they tend to complicate things. The presence of women demands the formation of relationships. Ultimately, this book has little to do with human relationships and everything to do with a man's journey through the ranks of the military. Johnny's goal is to be a soldier and nothing should come in the way of that. Clearly the filmmakers attempted to make the story more appealing to the masses by adding the sexual element. By casting Denise Richards in the role of Carmen, the film was luring in an audience that may not have been intrigued otherwise. When Johnny is dumped by Carmen via a video message, the viewer harbors a sense of compassion for Johnny. While the character obviously does not wear his heart on his sleeve, a human element is contributed to him. The film exagerrated the romantic relationships in a story that had almost none to speak of. Johnny spends his time at boot camp thinking the existence of women is a myth. But rather than focusing on the political underpinnings of the novel, the film adaptation delved into a topic mainstream film has little experience with - sex.