It's almost a year since the release of The Pleasant Profession of Robert A. Heinlein and I am still basking in the pleasure of seeing this project in print. The reviews have been very good and I was stunned to get a review in the Times Literary Supplement, which is not known for its interest in genre.
Fans have been pleasantly critical, spotting minor errors, and one horrendous howler (which I will try to correct if there is ever a second edition). Some have nodded all the way, others have had mixed feelings, and some readers hate it: I'm actually delighted by this mixed response. I actively wanted to write a book that would get people rethinking Heinlein's work, seeing it as an entire body of material--a life lived through literature--and perhaps rethinking what they liked, didn't like, what had worn well and what really had not. I really wanted readers to engage with Heinlein as a "classic" writer in the true sense, not someone we have to admire uncritically, but one who has enough depth and orneriness and awfulness to generate continuous new thought and revisiting.
Which is where I get cheeky.
If you think I achieved this, and you have nominating rights for this year's Hugos, I would love it if you added The Pleasant Profession of Robert A. Heinlein in the Best Related Category.
Thank you once again for supporting this project.