This story is available here via .pdf and here to read online.
1. The theme here comes directly from the plot: namely, a wonder at the stars that have and must change humanity. He is also postulating that stars are an important frontier for humans—they're literally hanging over our heads, a constant goal. This theme is shown through the plot much more than through the words of the characters: the newsman's reaction to closing the blinds, the cult acolyte's words, and Aton's closing monologue are the only three examples that I recall of the words supporting the theme. Even the omniscient narrator says nothing. The plot communicates the idea all but alone. But the sublimity of empty space and darkness and stars serves to humble at least one of the characters, which adds a wrinkle to this main theme.
2. I think there is a major plot hole: the planet has six suns and only one is eclipsed, therefore the other parts the planet would still be in light. Why would the entire culture fall if only one city is plunged into darkness?
3. The setup, pacing, and flow of information is perfect. Every explanation for every action is used by Asimov to establish another part of the world that he is building. For instance, of course their eyes cannot grow accustomed to darkness: they evolved on a planet of perpetual day time. This detail of the eyes builds logically from Asimov deeply examining the premise. Rather than an intro info dump, he begins with familiars—a skeptic newsman confronting a scientist on the verge of a great discovery—then reveals the context and builds the world with every action that proceeds through the novel. He approaches an interesting premise focused, starting with familiars, then building logically to a fantastic ending. It's consistent and the story is crafted extremely well. It's so simple and effective and interesting how every revelation is hung on a plot-hook or a conversation—but mostly on the plot actions. It's all tight and believable: the world the actions that conversations are tightly focused perfectly for a short story.
4. The writing is communicative but unexciting. Aton's fragmented ending monologue is probably the best writing of Asimov's I have yet come across, but nothing else excites or disappoints.
5. I still think the weakness of Asimov is his characters—they're not really complex enough and humanity is the focus, not humans. However, it is a short story, and this helps it stay focused. But since this is a little longer of a short story, perhaps more character depth could've been pulled off. Though he is using an ensemble cast so it probably wouldn't work.
No comments:
Post a Comment