www.sixfingeredman.net
..................................................
::. .  .   .     .       .          .

Isaac Asimov--The Foundation Trilogy

Author: Isaac Asimov Source: John

I'm astounded to find out how bad it is. About on page 200, I paused and thought to myself "200 pages... and there hasn't been a single woman character. This guy's concept of reality is seriously screwed." Shortly after the first speaking female character appears, and her role is to nag her husband and then shut up when he gives her some fancy jewelry. How did I not notice this earlier?!?

Maybe I've been reading too much Ursula LeGuin. If that's the case, though, then I'm glad. Asimov was had some really neat ideas... but as an author, as a chronicler of the human condition, he's woefully lacking.

One might say he's a product of his time, and that at the time the "default" concept of a world was one in which men did everything. At the risk of sounding like a close-minded liberal, this does not excuse the oversight in my eyes. Of course this doesn't reflect personally on Asimov in any case, but just as I don't get my science from Aristotle or reasoning from Descartes, I can appreciate Asimov's contributions while also recognizing that they have been long since surpassed.

Okay, on later consideration Bayta makes up for the previous lack very well. This ceases to become a very valid critism; although I'd still wonder what he was thinking in the first book.

Asimov never explains why the "lack of foreknowledge" is a requirement. I don't see why it should be, other than as a plot device. After all, Seldon is part of the system himself.

It is also ironic that most of his stories are about the actions and power of heroic individuals, seeming to contradict the idea that these events are inevitable.

Why are "crisis" situations necessary? I don't see how the number of variables or degrees of freedom can be controlled. Conceptually it makes sense in a vague sort of way, but concretely I don't buy it. It seems to counteract the "smoothness" requirement of any deterministic system; every event follows inevitably from the ones previous, so the concept of "critical points" (not in the math sense) is unnecessary. It may be that some points appear to be more critical from the view of the participants, but if the path which lead to the point was inevitable...

The idea seems to be to force things into stable points which minimize the effects of unknowns. But these stable points are a natural result of the functions, not something you can affect.

The Mule is my favorite part. Especially the bit with Magnifico is very well done. So much better than the previous book it's unbelievable.