Talk:Lazarus Long

Comments in third paragraph - do they belong?

From the article (bold is mine):

The promotional copy on the back of Time Enough For Love, the second book featuring the character of Lazarus Long, states that Lazarus was "so in love with time that he became his own ancestor," but this never happens in any of the published books. (yes it does in the one of the last books published - but it involves incest with his mother) This would be a better explanation of his longevity (since he would go back in time and give himself the longevity genes that were necessary for staying alive long enough to be able to go back in time and give himself the longevity genes).

Hey, who stuck this in here? It seems to me that comments like those belong on the talk page, NOT in the article. -- Enigmatick 06:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

The back usage of the word ancestor could be used irrelevant of genetics. Ancestors in a non genetic sense are those who come before. He goes back in time and becomes one of the people who shaped his life. Cerium136 04:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Wrong... he did NOT become his own ancestor. Yes, he had sex with his mother but he did not impregnate her. Later on he probably did when he brought her back to Tertius, but when he had sex with her in TEfL she was already pregnant with her husbands son. Plus, in order for him to become his own ancestor wouldn't he have to have sex with his Grandmother? Shonsu 04:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

No, he could be his own ancestor by merely impregnating his mother, not his grandmother. Think about it. What you perhaps are presuming is that he is also Maureen's ancestor, which is nowhere stated. --Uroshnor 14:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, RAH never does kill him off (and won't, so LL is now effectively immortal). Perhaps at some future date (in a book RAH never got around to writing) LL time-loops again, and does become his own ancestor? RobertAustin 20:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Heinlein used that plot in another story. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 20:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

The key to all the arguments about whether or not LL became his own ancestor is that Woodrow Wilson Smith (aka Lazarus Long) was born in 1912 and LL went back to 1916 - not only was he already born by this time, he met his younger self. Maureen also tells the story of Woodrow's conception in this book and in another. 69.42.34.160 (talk) 01:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)HistoryLunatic

Spoilers

I have just edited this page and moved the Spoiler warning higher. Some facts in the 2nd paragraph give away plot twists in the book Methuselah's Children. I feel the first couple of paragraphs need to be cleaned up a little so as to give a better idea who LL is. Warpedshadow 13:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

If any of you braniacs would bother to actually read the book, then you'd realize that when Lazarus states he is 213 years old, he gets his math wrong. If you are going to put a specific number in the article (213 is a very specific age), then at least check to see if it's correct. I know he says that's how old he is, but he's wrong. This article needs to be changed to reflect his true age, which I think is closer to 227 at the time he says it.

Obviously what Heinlein is saying is that despite the fact that Lazarus had then reached the oldest age ever obtained by any human in history, he was so unconcerned with his age that when someone asks him how old he is, he answers with the wrong age because he perhaps hasn't thought about it in years, so his math is shaky. Anyone who has read the book will know that when Mary asks him, "How old are you?" He says something like (I don't have the book in front of me), "One hundred...no...two hundred and thirteen." (Then still gets it wrong). Anyway, the article should be changed to reflect his true age at the time, with perhaps a word on what his arithmetic mistake implies about Lazarus' philosophy on life. --Uroshnor 09:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The current article states, "When the character of Lazarus Long is introduced in Methuselah's Children, he is 213 years old..." I must repeat: no, he is not. I don't have the book in front of me though (I'm on a different continent from my book collection at the moment), so could anyone who has access to the book please do the math and insert his true age into the article? I'm not going to do it since I'm not sure what it is (I'm relying on memory). Saying that he said he was 213, now that's true, but saying that's how old he is, that's false. --Uroshnor 09:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

On page 663 of my very old copy of The Past Through Tomorrow, Justin Foote says "the meeting of 2125" was "eleven years ago", which would make Lazarus 2136 - 1912 = 224 years old at the beginning of Methuselah's Children. -- Jim Douglas 06:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The Rambling about Back-Cover Blurbs in General

... kind of drifts a long way off the topic of L. L. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.228.160.95 (talk • contribs) 09:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

So it does. I have now pruned it quite a bit. However, that particular back copy is extremely misleading. The one on my copy of Time Enough for Love (Ace edition, 1988) not only has the "became his own ancestor" silliness, but sets out in bold type LAZARUS LONG 1916–4272 though clear internal evidence insists that Woodrow Wilson Smith was born on November 11 1912. On my first reading I kept expecting a surprise plot twist in which young Woody dies and it turns out that Lazarus has misremembered (?!) and is actually a younger brother or something such. (As I'm writing this, I notice that the figure 4272 is even more bogus: The novel opens in 4272, and according to dialogue in chapter XVII Lazarus is still alive in 4291). Sigh. Henning Makholm 16:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Notebooks

Nothing about all the sayings in the "Notebooks of LL"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.191.237.118 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 22 October 2006

So put it in. Be bold. The Notebooks of Lazarus Long are mentioned in the article on Time Enough for Love, in any case. --Michael K. Smith 19:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Timeline

There is no evidence in the text that the "New Beginnings" segment of "Time Enough for Love" occurred centuries before Lazarus returned to Secundus to die. Lazarus himself says "when she died, part of me died. I stopped wanting to live forever." This strongly suggests that he didn't seek rejuvination between leaving New Beginnings and arriving at Secundus, which puts the maximum timespan as his normal rejuvination cycle of 250 years less Dora Brandon's lifetime. That's not "centuries", and may not even be one century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon richardson (talk • contribs) 11:21, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Lazarus's Immortality

I think the comment that time travel renders him effectively immortal is putting the cart before the horse. The voice at the end of Time Enough for Love reads to me that Lazarus is writing his own story and lives on because he chooses to. The time travel and other things are just a result of that.

Heinlein shows at times that he is very aware that he is writing peoples stories from their own viewpoint. In Lazarus's stories, he is always genial and pleasant and generally the good guy. Yet in "The Cat Who Walks Through Walls" which uses a different protagonist, he is portrayed as crotchety and short tempered. In "The Number of the Beast", he even totally erases the lines between stories and "real life". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.149.58.143 (talk) 18:05, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Lazarus Long and Pham Nuen

I find a great similarity between these two characters. I think this is emphasized in the first part of this book and the first part of Time Enough for Love but the similar incidents at these times aren't the only common features. Their vast ages and the reverence with which some people treat them are other similarities. Even more, I find their personalities somewhat similar. 76.28.103.69 (talk) 17:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Will in New Haven76.28.103.69 (talk) 17:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Copyright status of image

Since when is this image public domain? It's an image with non-renewed copyright which is a derivative work of something (a Heinlein story) that is still under copyright. This would seem to indicate that under Stewart_v._Abend the image is copyrighted regardless of renewal or not.

See also It's a Wonderful Life. "Although the film's images had entered the public domain, the film's story was still protected by virtue of it being a derivative work of the published story "The Greatest Gift", whose copyright was properly renewed by Philip Van Doren Stern in 1971." Of course this case is a little different because it's already an image, but I'd think that if the images are based upon any description in the story (which they obviously are) it's still a derivative work of the story and therefore still under copyright. Ken Arromdee (talk) 18:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm a neophyte to wiki..

I'd like to note that Heinlein included incarnations of Lazarus Long in his "juvenile" books as well. Red Planet comes to mind to me. Most of the second chapter of Red Planet devotes itself to "Doc McRae's" knowledge of things that were beyond the ken of the key characters. "Doc McRae" also tends to force the issue and drive the plot forward with his (within the context of the story) references to freedom. At some point "Doc McRae" also mentions remembering the deserts of the "Great Pyramid" which was destroyed when sometime in the past when a certain faction stored atomic weapons in it. (have the book in hand, but can't be bothered to thumb thru it right now, I'm still finishing rereading it).

It might also be said that "Between Planets" may also have hints of Lazarus Long, in the character of "Sam Anderson", except that Sam, being a "Marine", paid the ultimate price for his ways. Heinlein always did like the military hero in the juvenile stories.

I haven't read Starship Trooper in a couple of decades, but would be willing to bet that there's a "Lazarus" character in that one as well. I'll have to try to find a copy and reread it. Great book, but I couldn't convince myself to even look at the movie, except the trailers.

Some things to consider. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redplanet1776 (talk • contribs) 03:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Children

Lapis Lazuli and Lorelei Lee are NOT Lazarus Long's children, they are his clones. Long fathered many hundreds of children throughout the 2000 or so years covered in the RAH books. I think this should be removed or clarified. Thanks, 108.248.24.226 (talk) 22:00, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

They were his children as well as his sisters (by virtue of being clones and thus having the same genetic parents) and, later, his wives. He raised them in his household (I think it was even mentioned that he formally adopted them, but I'm not positive on that). --Khajidha (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Spoof character

I seem to recall reading, long long ago, a thing about a spoof-character named Lazarus Longwinded. Am I imagining this or does anyone else remember such a thing? I can't seem to find any trace of it online!

Also, am I the first to notice (I can't imagine I would be) how similar Lazarus Long is to Wotan in The Ring of the Nibelung opera-cycle? HandsomeMrToad (talk) 16:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)