View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 2:41 am



Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Volume 2, Errors and Omissions 
Author Message
Centennial Attendee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 538
Location: Aurora, IL, USA, Terra
Post Re: Volume 2, Errors and Omissions
Page 219, typo:
Quote:
"A shadow on an X-ray suggested an aytpical kidney stone."
"Atypical."

More rocket science, page 338:
Quote:
Challenger lifted off from Taurus-Littrow on December 14. It was scheduled to splash down in the Pacific on December 19—two days after the first copy of Time Enough for Love arrived in Blassingame's office.
Challenger, the Lunar Module of the Apollo 17 mission, was not the vehicle that splashed down in the Pacific. That was the Command Module, America.

I suggest "Challenger lifted off from Taurus-Littrow on December 14. Its crew was scheduled to splash down..."

_________________
Bill Higgins
bill.higgins@gt.org
http://beamjockey.livejournal.com


Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:02 am
Profile WWW
Centennial Attendee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 538
Location: Aurora, IL, USA, Terra
Post Re: Volume 2, Errors and Omissions
Page 30:
(I admit this is a somewhat petty one.) Patterson is making a segue from describing Cornog's security-clearance troubles at the end of the previous chapter:
Quote:
The day before Heinlein sat down to write his Statement for Robert Cornog, which is dated May 17, 1949, he was able to tell Forrest Ackerman...
In fact the Statement, which was undoubtedly written in 1949, is misdated "May 17, 1945." So it is strictly incorrect to say it is dated 1949. (At least this is true of the copy in the Archive.)

I suggest "On May 16, 1949, the day before Heinlein sat down to write his Statement for Robert Cornog, he was able to tell Forrest Ackerman..."

_________________
Bill Higgins
bill.higgins@gt.org
http://beamjockey.livejournal.com


Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:06 am
Profile WWW
Centennial Attendee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 538
Location: Aurora, IL, USA, Terra
Post Re: Volume 2, Errors and Omissions
beamjockey wrote:
Page 30: [...]
]In fact the Statement, which was undoubtedly written in 1949, is misdated "May 17, 1945." So it is strictly incorrect to say it is dated 1949.
Patterson acknowledges this misdating in Footnote 102 of the "Half Done, Well Begun" chapter.

_________________
Bill Higgins
bill.higgins@gt.org
http://beamjockey.livejournal.com


Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:20 am
Profile WWW
Centennial Attendee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 538
Location: Aurora, IL, USA, Terra
Post Re: Volume 2, Errors and Omissions
Page 391: The 1977 Worldcon, Suncon in Miami Beach, preceded the event in Ypsilanti where Heinlein received an honorary degree at EMU. It is odd that Suncon follows the EMU ceremony in this account.

Page 407:
Quote:
However, it slowly develops that Heinlein is referring to Robert Aspirin, not Robert Heinlein;
Typo: "Asprin." The author's name is not spelled like the pill.

Page 425:
Quote:
After the initial successful meetings of the Citizens Advisory Council, Jim Ransome, who had helped Pournelle put together the invitation list
Typo: Jim Ransom (my old grad school buddy).

_________________
Bill Higgins
bill.higgins@gt.org
http://beamjockey.livejournal.com


Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:31 am
Profile WWW
Centennial Attendee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 538
Location: Aurora, IL, USA, Terra
Post Re: Volume 2, Errors and Omissions
Page 522, footnote 74 to Chapter 6:
Quote:
...and Heinlein himself did the additional writing to expand the script from a one-hour television production (i.e. 44 minutes of screen time, since television commercials take time away from story) to 63 minutes of screen time for a film…
The 44-minute script is a feature of our own era, when commercials and promos consume an appalling 16 minutes of each hour. But I doubt this was true in 1952 when Heinlein was working on Project Moonbase. I recall that in the 1960s, a combination of FCC regulations and the Broadcasters' Code limited commercials to a much smaller fraction of the televised hour.

The first version of the Code, adopted in 1951, suggested a limit of 6 minutes per hour for advertising in "class A" timeslots. Station breaks and promos might add a little more time to this.

Patterson's essential point is valid, but 44 is probably not the right number. I suggest changing it to "i.e. less than a full hour of screen time, since…"

(I think there is one other place in the book where he cites 44 minutes as the length of a TV "hour," but I cannot locate it just now.)

page 552, footnote 79 to Chapter 12:
Quote:
Walter J. Minton, published letter to Publisher's Weekly...

Publishers Weekly does not have an apostrophe. Even though it seems like it ought to.

_________________
Bill Higgins
bill.higgins@gt.org
http://beamjockey.livejournal.com


Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:26 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 1:57 pm
Posts: 1
Post Re: Volume 2, Errors and Omissions
Sorry to come so late to the party, but I have only just finished reading Volume 2. I found it very hard to believe this (page 598, note 27 to chapter 24):

Quote:
Isaac Asimov, In Joy Still Felt, 624. Asimov has the date wrong, as the cruise was over by December 14.


Asimov getting a date wrong?!

The relevant paragraph on page 338 of Vol 2 says, "Heinlein's talk had been postponed until the 11th...Small wonder Isaac Asimov characterized his talk as 'wandering'".

My copy of Asimov's "In Joy Still Felt" has this on page 624: "Fred Pohl gave a marvelous talk on December 11, while Bob Heinlein's I thought rather wandering. On December 13, we were home again." It is the US hardback edition, published 1980 and does not appear to be a later edition than the first printing. So I wonder where "December 14" was taken from?

The other thing which puzzled me was the question of exactly what Heinlein's blood type was - does anybody know for sure, please? On page 320, in chapter 23, there is this:
Quote:
During the course of the operation, Heinlein received blood transfusions collected from five anonymous donors. Since Robert had an uncommon blood type (universal recipient - Ginny had the even rarer universal donor type), it was almost certain that his life had been saved by the efforts of the National Rare Blood Club...
which would mean that his blood type was AB+ and Ginny's O-, but AB+ is rarer than O-. (Also this is confusing because if his blood type was "universal recipient", surely that would mean that the transfusions he received could have come from anyone at all?) But then on page 408, in chapter 29, we have this:
Quote:
His bone marrow was overproducing red blood cells. The treatment was oddly old-fashioned: They bled him, taking a pint of his A negative rare blood...
(A- is also rarer than O-, so this still doesn't fit with Ginny's blood type being rarer than Robert's).


Tue Sep 05, 2017 1:45 am
Profile
Heinlein Nexus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:10 am
Posts: 2232
Location: Pacific NorthWest
Post Re: Volume 2, Errors and Omissions
There seems to be - why am I not surprised? - little information and much of it contradictory. While everyone agrees that Heinlein had a rare blood type, few specify what it was. The rarest blood type, at 1% of the Caucasian population, is AB negative.

But that is not universal recipient; it can only receive from Rhesus negative types. AB+ is the universal recipient - for red blood cells. To complicate matters, the situation is different for plasma, where AB is the universal donor.

A negative type is still a tough hand to be dealt because negative types are rarer than positive types, but several types are harder to donate to than AB-.

Back to Heinlein's type. Some pages say he was AB+ (e.g. https://www.comic-con.org/toucan/10-rob ... ercon-2016); some say AB- (e.g. http://www.fanac.org/Denvention3/blooddrive.html). This page says it was "A2 negative"; the 2 does not appear to be a factor in compatibility. Wikipedia's source for his blood type agrees. I am tempted to go with AB- because that was Eunice's type in IWFNE, but that may have been exercising authorial license; when I was young there was some buzz around having an AB- type.

So what is the worst type to be for donations? Answer: O negative, which can only receive from O negative, which is 7% of the population. But it is the universal donor. So the type that would have made the most sense for Heinlein to be activist about would be O-, but it seems certain that whatever he was, it wasn't that.


Fri Sep 08, 2017 6:03 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF