Talk:Podkayne of Mars

Discussion of ending
Hi 68.50.125.89 -- Thanks for working on providing a vigorous defense of the ending as Heinlein originally wrote it. I felt, however, that what you wrote was repetitive, and the organization of the paragraph became unclear because you tacked your text onto the end. I've pared it way back down, and reorganized it into two paragraphs. Could we talk here about it?--Bcrowell 15:08, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Bcrowell, Sure, i think you make a good point that I had become repetitive. I respected your edit, and I only readded the points that Heinlein sought to make that the pure of heart often suffer for the sins of others, and through no fault of their own, and there are not, alas, often in life, happy endings. I hope you agree the one change was acceptable. I felt your edit was good, allowing the point to remain that Podkayne only returned to rescue the fairy, and gave her life in the process. I felt the whole book hinged on the ending, and the forced change of it ruined what was honestly a true tragedy, and one that made several really disturbing points. Thoughts? By the way, 68.50.125.89 and oldwindybear are myself, one and the same! A "PS" thought, i went back and edited myself, after reading your critique again. I did feel that one sentence, stressing that the changed ending did not just void Uncle Tom's questions about parenting, but voided the seering point that too terribly often the pure of heart and innocent perish or suffer through no fault of their own...(I hate to say it, but your version was better than mine, more coherant! Ouch!  Thanks!) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oldwindybear (talk • contribs) 18:17, 3 September 2005  (UTC)


 * Hi -- I'm glad we seem to be converging on a version that presents both points of view clearly and forcefully. I personally feel that both endings are weak, and that this makes the book one of the poorest of his juveniles. In any case, it's been a pleasure working with you on this article! --Bcrowell 18:23, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

HI again, and thanks for the help; working with you was indeed a pleasure. I agree the book is weak -- but ironically, I find the ending where she died to be quite powerful. I think only that ending makes any sense of an otherwise very ordinary juvenile science fiction story. How do you rate "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress?" (one of my personal favorites; everyone else concentrates on "Starship Troopers;" I also liked "Star Beast" which I found hilarious with the role reversal of humans being pets!)In any event, take care. I am usually over in the Mongol section, or with Charles Martel! Again, a pleasure to work with someone intelligent, reasonable, and a better writer than I am, darn it! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oldwindybear (talk • contribs) 18:28, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Question about Different Endings
I just finished re-reading Podkayne of Mars (Berkeley Medallion Edition, 1/1970, 7th printing). In this ending Poddy is hurt, but will recover, and Uncle Tom lectures Dad. The article says "Podkayne is injured by the bomb, but will recover, and the moral of the story, as spoken by Uncle Tom, is omitted entirely." Do you know if there are three different endings? I'm wondering if this could be someone's memory playing tricks on them, or perhaps the 1995 version with both ending omitted UT's lecture in one of the endings to avoid repeating it. I don't suppose anyone has a first edition copy of this book? DejahThoris 08:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I've edited to make it clear that Tom's lecture takes place in both books, it is just altered in the version where Podkayne survives. And no, thre are only two endings, the Baen edition makes it clear.--Wehwalt 10:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Wehwalt I won't get in an editing war, and you are right to the extent that it does not directly say Poddy died of radiation - but it clearly says on page 173, "she was outside the circle of total destruction - but caught by the blast. With a live baby fairy in her arms, her body had protected it." Bluntly, if the blast had killed her directly, the fairy would not have survived. Period. Just as at the two sites real atomics were used, people outside the circle of total destruction almost always died of radiation poisoning. And no mother carrying a child is known to have had the child survive the blast by shielding it with her body! I lived in Japan, and believe me, every aspect of those bombing has been religiously explored, and they are the only authority on blast death and circle of destruction. "According to most estimates, about 40,000 of Nagasaki's 240,000 residents were killed instantly, and over 25–60,000 were injured. The total number of residents killed is believed to be perhaps as many as 80,000, including those who died from radiation poisoning in the following months." My point is, it is not clear whether the blast itself, or radiation, killed Poddy. I am allowing your ending to stand though, because I thought it accurate as far as it went, and I have previously argued on the relative value of the endings enough. old windy bear 11:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Not a problem and I apologize if I was brusque. I think that you have pointed out a hole in Heinlein's logic here.  If Poddy was not far outside the circle of total destruction, she was doomed anyway unless they can do miracles.  But, as I understand it, it takes days to die of radiation sickness.  Clark's narrative makes it clear that help arrived quickly after the blast, though it of course took some time for Poddy to be found.  I suppose Poddy could have been incapacitated by the blast, and lay there suffering from injuries until she dies of radiation sickness.  But that isn't what the most obvious reading of the text says, and I think we go with that unless there's a strong reason to discard it.  I read it, and I've always assumed, that Poddy died of the effects of the blast, rather than the blast itself, say, a tree branch falling on her while she was protecting the baby fairy, or the like.  I admit, I've always been uncomfortable by those who have pointed out--what did the fairy eat when it got hungry?--Wehwalt 18:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Wehwalt This is the kind of discussion that makes wikipedia a true joy, someone discussing holes in theories or stories, without getting angry or nasty. You bring an excellent point on the fairy, and Heinlein was not clear enough on Poddy's death - if she was outside the circle of destruction, by definition, she could NOT have died from the blast direct, but the aftereffects. The Japanese say some were so close the burns killed them in hours or days, which is what I suspect happened to our poor Poddy - but as you point out, Heinlein sort of leaves us wondering. (Even with immediate medical help, severe burns at the edge of the circle of destruction would have killed her in hours -- we lived in Japan in 1954-57, and they were the world's experts on atomic hell, and the wounds were still raw, literally!) All in all, given the uncertainty, your ending was superior. A good way to end the article, and I - who was trying to emphasize the horror of death outside the circle of destruction, if swift, hours by burns or horrendous radiation poisoning, if not swift, months of agony - for as sweet a character as ever existed in a novel. But you are right - we are not certain what exactly killed Poddy, except it was not a direct effect of the blast. So again, your ending is the best. I will add on this subject that perhaps that is why I prefer the original ending, because Heinlein is right, offtimes in life, things end badly, and for wonderful people. old windy bear 19:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, the memories! I read this book when I was in the eighth grade (1979). Did anyone besides me take note of Poddy's talk early on of how she was, shall we say, "growing up"? Of course, my adolescent boy's imagination noted it...between that and her attitude toward things, to me Poddy Fries would have been the perfect girlfriend and I imagined her being the most beautiful girl in the galaxy...I'm going to have to go to the library and see if they have this wonderful book--MarshallStack 18:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

"Kill somebody? Fine"
Actually, Podkayne tells us that on Venus murder is considered a very serious breach of regulations that will have you working like a slave for the rest of your natural life to pay off the indemnity, and concludes that if you want to kill somebody you should lure him to somewhere like Mars or Earth where it's a social matter and all they do is hang you or something. No future in it on Venus.

Now that she mentions it, I wonder whether hanging would work on Mars. Low gravity. But I digress... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.232.99.143 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Probably. Longer ropes, or else pull the rope akin to tying it to horses.  Or weight the prisoner.--Wehwalt 14:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Timeline (internal consistency)
A comment was made in the article (since removed, see "No Original Research) that there is not enough time in the events in the novel for the diary to have been written. If this can be documented by reference to timings internal to the novel, then it might be suitable for inclusion. Hu 07:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the editor was referring to the self evident fact that regardless of the ending, Heinlein had to have someone else finish the story because Poddy was in no position to do it.--Wehwalt 14:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

No, Clark finished off the diary. But the part that Podkayne writes deals with plotting with Clark to escape from Mrs. Grew. Either she sat up all night mumbling that last entry into her tape recorder, which seems unlikely given that the room was probably bugged, or else there just wasn't time for her to make the entry. If that argument is unconvincing, or devious enough to count as Original Research, well, so be it.


 * Nice point. If you can find a way to squeeze it in, go right ahead.--Wehwalt 16:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Plot
Missing the section of the book where Poddy & Clark are on the ship and Poddy is helping out the racist older ladies. Tom as I recall was black, and both Poddy & Clark would have been of mixed race. Clark of courst gets his revenge on the old ladies by soaking their washclothes with some kind of coloring agent resulting in them having bright yellow-colored faces.


 * I left it out because it wasn't a major part of the plot. We already know Clark is...ahem..."unusual". Clarityfiend 04:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually one lady turned bright red, leading Poddy to think she was dead of radiation and the other was bright yellow. Tom was Maori, not black, down to the picking teeth gesture implying cannibalism. BipolarBear (talk) 23:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Poddy's Mom
I've modified the rather bald statement that Mrs. Fries was not neglectful to make it from Poddy's POV. There are some hints that Heinlein drops to make it clear that Mom wasn't around too much. First, Poddy makes passing reference to various space construction projects that Mom was involved in (Deimos, for example). Second, Poddy mentions that she had to save Clark from falling into the Grand Canal repeatedly. I'd think Clark would be over that kind of thing by age six, so that means that until age 12 or 13, Poddy had some pretty strong reponsibilities vis a vis Clark. Third, although it is possible that all this space construction took place before Poddy was born, after the "triplets" are decanted, Mom is repeatedly on the phone explaining that she isn't available for projects. If her active career in space construction ended with Poddy's birth, it is hard to see why anyone would call. So Tom's criticism may be valid; we don't know. So I've rephrased it to mean that Poddy doesn't view her mom as neglectful.--Wehwalt 18:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Poddy's Mom as Role Model
I grew up in the 1950's and 1960's when women just didn't do this sort of thing...it was a real revelation to find a character - in a juvenile read (though I didn't differentiate in those days) - who not only was a mother but a senior engineer on some major projects. THIS was the woman I wanted to be...and today I am a Professional Engineer, Ph.D., etc. etc., play with some extremely big toys, and am a fairly major noise in my field. Not to mention raising children (and now grandchildren) and supporting the whole bunch of them. Oh - and my husband is an art historian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.156.147 (talk) 16:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank God you didn't choose Poddy herself to be your role model then. Otherwise you'd probably be fully absorbed by babies and your aspirations in life be restricted to caring for babies in a cool environment (maybe not a spaceship though). --Mudd1 (talk) 22:22, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Uncle Tom's lecture in the epilog
Is this only part of the revised ending, or also of the original ending of the story? If it's in both, then the article is currently misleading. FilipeS (talk) 16:21, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is only in the version where Poddy survives.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

John Varley
John Varley has been writing novels as homages to Heinlein's novels, including Red Lightning, Red Thunder and Rolling Thunder. I haven't read them yet, and I hope somebody else can include something about them here. 99.9.112.31 (talk) 21:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)NotWillDecker