In "The Roads Must Roll" by Robert A. Heinlein, is Gaines’ method of dealing with the problem the best one? Why or why not?

-- Anonymous, March 02, 2005

Answers

I don't know if it was the best one. It was abit risky, but then again it did work. It seemed to me that a person with that Van, with his personality and instability may have blown up the road. On the other hand, using military force would have made a martyr. But in the end, I just don't know. There probably was a better way.

-- Anonymous, March 02, 2005

I think it was. Van was clearly a bit loony, and if Gaines really had gone in there with guns blazing, then he would have lost a lot more men and possibly the Road itself. His method of bargaining with Van Greeck (sp?) as an equal, and then taking advantage of his weakness was risky, but it was the one way that put himself in the most danger and ran the least risk of hurting others. Since he managed to do research and find his enemy's weaknesses beforehand, I think that Gaines' way was definitely the best.

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

Cool story. Kinda reminded me of Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin.

Gaines' plan for dealing with Van was definitely risky; he was crazy, and seemed able to blast the road just out of spite. On the other hand, Gaines did show remarkable foresight in researching Van's psych profile, and performed admirably in reading Van's thought processes. As for the plan of action being overly bold, one must remember that enlarging the conflict - such as by calling in the army - would help the rebels by removing focus from Van's instability. And besides, one must always remember that "fortune favors the bold."

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

While not the best one, as Will mentioned, you really can't argue with results. Gaines did manage to show not only the flaws of Functionalism but the fact that he did deserve the job he had. By outsmarting Van and saving the country, he showed that his innate brilliance and instincts far outweighed those of an ordinary road worker.

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

The method that Gaines used was very risky, but probably was the only option. He made the best of a bad situation. It was startling bravery, actually, he was prepared to sacrifice himself for others. He was in a bind, if he went in guns blazing, then Van would blow up the road. If he called in the army, it would involve massive damage, and Van still might be able to ignite the bomb. By going in himself he weighed the advantage [possibly no massive death] against the disadvantage [almost assured massive death.] Yes he made the right decision.

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

I think that Gaines's method of dealing with the problem to be the just about the best there was. As I was reading the story, I thought that he was maybe being too forward by having the cadets armed and prepared to shoot if necessary. However, seeing that the Functionalists fired the first shot, Gaines had the right idea. Overall, I was quite impressed by his actions throughout the story, though he may not have particularly impressed Blekinsop (awesome name).

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

I was somewhat surprised by Gaines' method for dealing with Van Kleeck. Gaines seemed like he was an intellectual man who planned everything and tried to have stuff controlled. The fact that he would actually use physical force in the end to get his way is startling, and effective. Taking into account the result, I would say that his method was the most effective.

Just to let everyone know, Isaac Asimov completely stole the idea of the belts with people on them in his robot series.

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

I don't know enough about psychology to say if Gaines' method was THE best one, but it was certainly effective. The incident with Harvey tells me he wouldn't have had better luck dealing with the men directly, and he was only prepared to deal with the ringleader anyways - he was the only insurgent with an untampered profile at hand.

By the way, I'm out practicing "applied sci-fi" at the robotics regionals, and please tell Lars that he's missing out for me, and pressure him into joining robotics next year. Also, be sure to visit us, team 422 at the Siegel Center Friday or Saturday at any time from 10-5; it's free! Our team will be wearing gray shirts with dragons on the front, and hopefully pointed green Link hats. Support your fellow geeks!

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

I felt that his way of dealing with the situation was bad, but the only option he had. I mean, let this dude take over the roads, or let him blow up the roads? They both bite but so he sort of flipped a coin on it. However, messing with the mind of a mad man is never good, because well ... they're MAD. So it was crazy risky but hey it was bad no if he didn't do anything at all.

Ror

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2005

I feel that it was a pretty good way to exploit Van's inferiority complex. You usually see the main character as one who is unsympathetic, and using army psychology. He doesnt seem one to use psychology, but in the end, I can see that it was very effective in taking out the man with the red button.

-- Anonymous, March 04, 2005