Foundation's Edge

Stats

Foundation’s Edge by Isaac Asimov

Audiobook narrated by Scott Brick

1983 Hugo Award Winner

Got it from: Public Library

16h 19m

Anyone who has read any part of the Foundation Trilogy is aware of the engrossing and never ending battle of intricacies between Harry Seldon’s First and Second Foundations.  Just imagine the effect of the introduction of a third group, one consisting of an even more mentally powerful population, one that is free to operate outside of The Seldon Plan.  In Foundation’s Edge, Asimov does just that and the effect is a threat on the very existence of the First and Second Foundations.

“I have this gift of coming to a conclusion on the basis of almost nothing”

The central conflict throughout the third and fourth installments of the Foundation Series takes place between the opposing physical scientists of the First Foundation and the mentalic/intuitionist Second Foundation, both of which are integral to the Seldon Plan.  Foundation’s Edge adds a new element which exists outside The Plan.  The universe of the Foundation has become an interesting one in which objective knowledge takes a back seat to the unbelievable powers of intuition and telepathy.  It is a universe in which the spoken word and physical phenomena give away less about the plot than the knotted and obscured tendrils of logic and the mental strength and stamina of characters who are rarely what they appear.  It also makes for a never ending staccato of extremely tense moments which are suddenly and unexpectedly resolved by a character’s sudden and, until that moment, opaque intuition or realization. 

The idea of a universe in which people, can utilize the powers of intuition to construe facts from seemingly too little information on occasion gives rise to characters who come too rapidly and too confidently to right understanding and situations and tensions which seem to be solved by some kind of mental deus ex machina.  This is an issue I have struggled with throughout the Foundation Series and Foundation’s Edge did not break that mold, but it was certainly toned down compared to the third installment of the trilogy. Still, the way in which events in Foundation’s Edge are advanced so suddenly, simply by introducing some new awareness or piece of information that readers never could have been privy to, started to potentially grate on me near the end.

“I was just about to tell our guest the story of eternity”

By the time this quote was delivered, I was already well on my way to solidifying my biggest concern about this book.  Yes, I struggled with the way in which characters suddenly come to knowledge without a hint to the readers, but all-in-all I didn’t really have too much heartburn about it.  My real complaint though is that it seemed Asimov was trying to do way to damn much in Foundation’s Edge.  I would have been happy to learn of the anti-mules and go through the process of both Foundations looking for them, but Foundation’s Edge touches on about a million other pretty major topics.  This is not to say that Asimov didn’t make robots, the origin of humanity, FTL travel, etc. all fun, but it made for a fairly quick treatment of each and the tying up of all those elements in the end felt a little shaky and started to lose my attention.

Actually, that’s not much of a complaint is it?  I do have a better complaint (or would that be worse?), but it’s in the form of a spoiler, so read on with caution:

<<SPOILER: Bliss was a difficult character for me.  I had predicted the possibility that she wasn’t human as soon as she avoided the question, but then the issue was left alone until the very end.  The question about who or what she really was, was then overshadowed by her extreme objectification (and the same issue would apply to Novy as well), and I had basically forgotten about the issue until the end.  Probably not the best treatment of some possibly very cool characters and I was definitely disappointed.  I also wondered if I might have taken more from Bliss had I read any of Asimov’s robot stories.  Asimov himself suggests them as companion pieces in the afterword so maybe I’ll be more excited about her after I get to some of those.  Any thoughts about Bliss for those of you who’ve read this? >>

Recommendation

Written almost 30 years after the Foundation Trilogy, the fourth book was still, for the most part, unintelligible from the first three.  Perhaps the effect was aided by the fact that I listened to books 3 and 4 as audiobooks and Scott Bricks read them both.  Whatever the case, I think it’s fair to say that if you’re a fan of the Foundation Trilogy, you’ll enjoy Foundation’s Edge too.  I haven’t fallen in love with this series in the same way others have, but it is certainly very good stuff!

HEP SCORE

Universe 5/5

Social/Political Climate 5/5

Dialogue 3/5

Scientific Wonders 5/5 (gravitics, robots, telepathy blocks…yes)

Characters 2/5

Overall 20/25

This week’s book is Neuromancer by William Gibson.  According to the publisher the book that brought cyberpunk to the world.  New author, new subgenre – what could go wrong?

Next week’s book is The Fountains of Paradise by Arthur C. Clarke.  I have read two of Clarke’s novels.  One was okay, the other was pretty great.  Where will this one fall?

The Gods Themselves

Boring Kindle book cover.

Stats

The Gods Themselves by Isaac Asimov

1973 Hugo Award Winner

Got it from: Public Library

314 Pages

Separated into three different but parallel stories, The Gods Themselves begins when scientists have discovered a way to exchange energy with another universe, the para-universe.  Things get dicey when what is at first possibly the single greatest scientific achievement in history, threatens to become a horror story as it is understood that not only the two universes exchanging energy, but also physical laws which could result in our sun going nova.

Eternal contemporaneity

Published in ’72, winner in ’73, this is another title that it seems difficult to separate from the public scientific discourse of its time.  The early 70’s marked the passage of some of the most monumental environmental protection regulations in American history.  I saw The Gods Themselves very clearly drawing on the experience of environmental and consumer protection messages being hashed out on the national political stage.  But before I’ve got you thinking this is a book about vast conspiracies and coordinated cover-ups, rest assured Asimov elevates his discussion to broader epistemological concerns and again draws on the sentiment of the times as he pulls in questions that, given the 1962 publishing of Thomas Kuhn’s, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, spoke to the very heart of the philosophy of science in his day.

Where Asimov approaches the masterful with The Gods Themselves, is not just the incorporation of some pretty elusive and theoretical subject matter, but in that he makes it genuinely fun and doesn’t ever come off overly-intellectual or supercilious (not that Kuhn’s thoughts on non-linear paradigm shifts and the role of subjectivity/objectivity in science aren’t fun).  Without much thought, this could be a pretty great weekend read, but a little more attention also turns up some steamy philosophizing too.  Sure, Asimov touches on elements of Kuhn’s Scientific Revolutions, but I also found The Gods Themselves was especially poignant in an age of vehement and politically motivated skepticism.

“Oh, it was turning sour anyway.  It’s lasted long enough.  What bothers me more—much more—is that he violently refuses to accept your interpretation of the Pionizer experiments you ran after the surface observations.”

“I told you the way it would be.”

“He said he had seen your results.”

“He glanced at them and grunted.”

“It’s rather disillusioning.  Does everyone just believe what he wants to?”

“As long as possible.  Sometimes longer.”

Part 3 – Chapter 12

The Gods Themselves is also strikingly apropos of issues of privatization and commercialization science which have been in the news rather frequently of late.  England recently decided to give the entire country access to its top science journal and the arguments for the free and open sharing of all information and media – including science – seem to be gaining in popular appeal.

“An odd thought.  But perhaps it was that the fewer who knew of your Intuitionism, the fewer would suspect your contribution to what would otherwise be put to his sole credit.”

Part 3 – Chapter 12

Being broken up into three parts, I was most attracted to this theme.  The intrigue of trying to uncover scientific mystery whilst averting possibly serious calamity was really fun, and the juxtaposition of the separate struggles in the normal and para-universes with the same problem was great (even if Book II was something of an unneeded break).

Asimov was also writing this just 10 years shy of the centennial of Henrik Ibsen’s, Enemy of the People, which was published 90 years earlier in 1882.  In fact, I read this as a great update (intentional or otherwise) to the classic which so accurately portends the future struggles to be faced by environmental and consumer advocates of the 60’s and 70’s, and really enjoyed pulling out those connections.  There are characters who just don’t want to believe the worst will happen.  Those who refuse to believe the worst won’t happen, and those who set out to prove the worst could happen. Then of course there are the spineless media and politicians.  In Asimov’s tale though, the scope has expanded by orders of magnitude.  Instead of the threat of pollution that could ruin a growing town, Asimov has threatened the destruction of the world, the entire spiral arm of our galaxy to be exact.  That the consequences couldn’t possibly affect us in our lifetime is big here and Asimov very clearly has little respect for those willing to externalize such consequences.

Recommendation

Now having read every Hugo Award winner through 1979, this book felt very much a part of the genre.  It is certainly not to say that The God’s Themselves was derivative or overly referential, but it recalled this or that from a number of the earlier winners and as I mentioned above, of non-SF titles too, and the effect was something akin to a pleasant reminiscence.  I liked a lot about this book but pulled-up short of seriously falling in love with anything.  I haven’t read much of Asimov, but this makes me want to read more.

HEP SCORE

Universe 3/5

Social/Political Climate 5/5

Dialogue 4/5

Scientific Wonders 5/5

Characters 5/5

Overall 22/25

The role of the die...

This week’s book is Downbelow Station by C.J. Cherryh.  This is a pretty long book, so I’m gonna be devoting a lot of time to reading this week.

Next week’s book is Cyteen by C.J. Cherryh.  This book is extra-long, so I’m probably gonna die of starvation or my eyes will fall out or something.

The Mule

My copy from our library

Stats

The Mule by Isaac Asimov

Published 1945 in Astounding Science Fiction

Retro Hugo Awarded in 1996 for 1946

244 pages

Normal book format

I’ll spoil this right now.  My first review is going to be an unashamed panning.  Many people love the Foundation Series books, but I’m going bold.

Since this is the first book, the format and rating system is still up for grabs as far as I’m concerned, so please let me know what works and what doesn’t, or just make your own suggestions.  This is a pretty short discussion so pick on anything you want in the comments.  Enjoy!

Psychohistory

Psychohistory is a branch of mathematical sciences in the Foundation Series which allows scientists, one in particular, to anticipate the future.  Psychohistory assumes individuals are not important on historical scales as an individual’s actions cannot dramatically change the course of history (interestingly though, technological advances are one of the few events that do alter history unexpectedly enough to render psychohistorical computations ineffective).  The founder of the science, Hari Seldon, was able to predict the course of history with an extremely high degree of certainty.  This ability guided him in the creation of The Foundation, the society which would eventually overthrow the Galactic Empire.

The Mule was written in 1945, the year Auschwitz was liberated, and I kept waiting for metaphors about epistemic responsibility or something…anything.  Instead of picking up on the possibility for intense philosophical debate though, The Mule becomes a story of selfish revenge and relies on a surprise twist to keep readers interested.  In the end, psychohistory’s inability to predict the histories of individuals and their emotions, threatens the existence of the Foundation because of The Mule’s mutant ability to read and influence emotions. 

At first glance, you might be tempted to think this is an actual statement about individuality or something, but really I think this was a huge cop-out for Asimov.  In every other instance, Psychohistory was right…but in this case it was wrong.  That is probably an inappropriately simplistic take, but to me it was cheap and disinteresting.  How unfortunate that the most interesting element of the book was also the most disappointing.

“Let me tell you a story”

At the end of the book, The Mule gives one of those evil-plot-and-motivation reveals.  He literally stops and says, “Let me tell you a story.”   I will say this as clearly as I can: any book or film in which this happens is disrespectful to the reader.  All authors should know that we both can and want to interpret complex human emotions and awkward social situations on my own.  This is absolutely unacceptable.  Always.

This is also one of my favorite things to gripe about so allow me to illustrate.

My “Red Delicious” Apple complex: Red delicious apples are universally known to be one of the most disgusting fruits in existence.  They are.  Other apples with names which describe how wonderful they taste are rare and yet, in the case of those apples not named for their taste, they are all decidedly delicious.  So why the hell are they calling these things “Red Delicious”?!  Because we would never care about it or buy it if they didn’t tell us what to think of it.  I hate this, and so should you.  As Vine Deloria penned, “If you think about it, you will see that it is true.”

Similarly, if poor writers didn’t tell us exactly what was happening and how to interpret it, we wouldn’t care.  The effect of this exchange was to make me want to stop reading with five pages left.  My extra sloppy grammar should indicate how upset I was about this ending.  This is pretty elementary stuff and I was really surprised to see it come from one of the most popular science fiction writers ever. 

Recommendation

The pace of this book gave the impression of the film adaption of a wildly popular book.  In this case, the film would have been devoid of the meaningful relationships and dialogue that made the book great and would’ve had an overly fast moving plot with deeply unsatisfying gaps in time large enough to withhold substance and evoke severe frustration.  It is an easy and fast paced read (simply because it spans over a hundred years), but lacks any justification for moving so quickly (little action, flat character development).

I am borderline supes disappointed with this Hugo Award.  The Mule had some good material for possible social commentary but Asimov completely escapes saying anything about it.  So for that which I would normally overlook considerable flaws the book ends up being totally uninteresting and lost my attention.  While the ending was exciting and fast paced, it was only interesting to the extent that unanticipated plot turns can be and the overwhelming feeling I was left with was a bored disinterest.  Although The Mule (Book 2) was marginally better than The General (Book 1) it does not stand on its own and I have a hard time believing this book would have won had they not waited until 1996 to give this award. 

HEP SCORE

Universe: 4/5 (Milky Way Galaxy, never on Earth though!)

Social/Political Climate: 4/5

Dialogue: 1/5

Scientific Wonders: 3/5

Characters: 3/5 (The Mule is really the only saving grace)

Overall: 15/25

In the words of Jack Black, “so far, off to a bad start.”


Edit: I forgot to include mention that I'll be reading The Big Time by Fritz Leiber this week and the roll of the die landed me with Double Star by Robert A. Heinlein next week.  So fun.  Many thanks to my friend Donald for giving me the dice idea!

"Hell Is Other People"

On another occasion his beloved daughter Robyn asked him to suppose he had to choose between her and writing.  Asimov recalled he said, “why, I would choose you, dear.”  And added, “but I hesitated-and she noticed that, too.”

IsaacAsimov: The Foundations of Science Fiction by James Gunn

Recall that Asimov wrote over a hundred books and was published in every category of the Dewey Decimal System.  I have often remarked that I dislike learning much about my favorite authors/artists because I usually think a lot less of them once I have.  This just makes me sad though.

A Flawed System

The first decade I’ll be reading is the 1950’s but as a result of a “Retro” award being given in 1996 for the year 1946, I’ve included the book in this decade since they didn’t hit every year in the 50’s anyway.  After all the hoopla about how to choose a book, of course the die tells me to read the first winner: The Mule by Isaac Asimov.  I am glad it worked out this way though because this book exposes straight away some of the many flaws with my very serious, but arbitrary, system that I’ve designed.  First, The Mule was originally published as a stand-alone novel but has since been published as Book II of Foundation and Empire, which is itself the second book in his Foundation Series (One of Asimov’s most famous, along with the Robot Series).  So there it is; the first book of this challenge and we've already hit on layer upon layer of problems with this ridiculous, but quasi-legally binding, system that I’ve designed.  Should I also read any books that weren’t winners, but were part of a series?  Should I only read Book II since Book I never won a Hugo Award?  Are Retro Hugo’s even real?  How many pages will count toward my page count?  How many questions can I ask in a row without losing people’s attention?

In order to make my way through this gauntlet of dilemmas, I had to rely on the same method I used to design this challenge.  That is to say, I submitted to whimsy and rapidly decided whatever the stink I felt like doing.  Of course, the most important of those questions was answered for me when I realized there are some winners like Mirror Dance which are quite deep in their series (it’s book 14 of the Vorkosigan Saga) and I would never be able to go through and read every book from every series (despite the very real anguish this causes me).  Although it makes sense, it could still present some very serious problems.  When the awards were voted on, readers presumably had the benefit of reading all the books leading up to that year’s winner.  Without that benefit, will I think less of a book without having met the characters before?  I really struggled with this problem so I think I very probably will.  So, consider this your warning that there might be some pretty heavy caveat-ing of some of my future posts.


In any case, this should be an exciting book as Asimov represents one of the “Big Three” of science fiction along with Robert A. Heinlein and Arthur C. Clarke.  If we’ve learned anything from the amount of big three’s that have come and gone in the NBA, we should always be cautious about what seems to be the easy favorites.  In particular, Asimov was extremely prolific, having written over 100 books, so the likelihood that even a goodly portion will be home runs seems dubious to me.  I have also never read anything by Asimov before so all in all, I think the stakes are pretty damn high this week (which is a great way to start).

In order to make sure I have time to get books from various sources, I’ll be rolling the die a week in advance so here you go.  Next week’s book will be the 1958 (non-retro) winner, The Big Time by Fritz Leiber.