Again Asimov structures his story with scenes separated widely. Third novel in a row. This time Seldon grows older, each scene exists years apart. Instead of searching for Earth, or trying to understand humanity through different groups, here scenes show stages of the Empire’s collapse and Seldon’s aging. The journey idea of the last two novels serves this structure better, but hey, this wasn’t entirely unreadable.
Intuition is the art, peculiar to the human mind, of working out the correct answer from data that is, in itself, incomplete or even, perhaps, misleading.Is there tension? I mean, by now everything published in the Foundation series points to Seldon winning. With Seldon facing physical danger and the interventions not yet recorded, I feel no tension. It feels more like, “I wonder how Hari Seldon gets out of this,” because I know he does. Though that tendency appears in a large amount of Asimov’s writing, it’s just more poignant in these two prequels. (This critique equally applies to the last novel too, Prelude to Foundation, though there the mythic tone imparted by the mystery-filled encyclopedia quotes really help my interest in it. It may just be that Seldon’s origins and early struggles interest me more.)
People live and die by nonsense. It's not what is so much as what people think is.
It’s a sticky trick, prequels. Asimov’s problem here is that he relies on the same old danger he always has--physical violence. I know Seldon survives to old age already, the title of the series gives away his success even to somebody reading these two prequels first. So, these two, and mostly this one, come across as fan service. Yet, in Prelude there still exists a chance of Seldon being some sort of conglomeration of people, a fiction, and this Seldon being replacable. But that doesn’t happen, and this story falls flat. Not because Asimov didn’t do what I would’ve done, that would be the worst critique ever; simply because I struggled to find tension in the last novel, hence the conspiracy theory, and failed to find it in this one.
You must have minimalism because every change, any change, has myriad side effects that can’t always be allowed for. If the change is too great and the side effects too many, then it becomes certain that the outcome will be far removed from anything you’ve planned and that it would be entirely unpredictable.
How could it be done better than this? Well, raise and answer different questions, apply different stresses, and resolve differently are ever only the three options. Instead of answering the questions of psychohistory, clearly what the fanbase wanted, he answers the question of what Seldon was like as an old man. Not as engaging. Instead of applying interpersonal conflicts and politics, Asimov apply’s physical violence that the reader already knows isn’t dangerous. He still has trouble writing characters. Instead of resolving this as a triumph, it takes a Shakespearean tragedy turn, which I don’t mind so much.
The word 'tradition' covered it all, as it covered so many things, some useful, some foolish.
All that said, this novel shows Seldon’s devotion, and losing everything he loves. The personal and public sacrifices to his job, to his calling. It’s chilling and heartwarming simultaneously. Asimov knows this story from the inside, this being his last written book, and it’s his final statement: beware dreams, you know not what they will cost, and prioritize rationally to ensure you serve what you believe. This theme engages the reader well, and it had better, because to book focuses on it.
You don’t need schooling to be a philosopher. Just an active mind and experience with life.
In short, not a great book. But also not unreadable. The theme grabbed me and I happily stared at the car wreck and triumph of Seldon’s life. However, when it was over, I rejoiced. I’m not sure I want to read more of Asimov’s long fiction. This is bad fan service.
People tended to avoid the humiliation of failure by joining the obviously winning side even against their own opinions.
No comments:
Post a Comment