/lit/ - Literature

>>23379869
I read the Foundation Trilogy a few months ago, maybe late last year.
It's very, very full of itself and self-congratulatory in a pseudointellectual fashion, meant to make midwits feel really smart when the comprehension of the transparently telegraphed plot twists settle in. It's written in a style halfway between the monosyllabic single-digit IQ style of Ernest Hemingway and the comically outdated high-falutin' technojargon of autistic silver age SF fans. It's enjoyable enough, but it's rather underwhelming, like a Michael Crichton techno-thriller without the thrills. If you treat it as essentially children's literature like The Wizard of Oz, you'll like it well enough.

>>23109339
The likes of Asimov are only valuable insofar as they are relics of an extremely primitive and hoity-toity age of scifi that enjoyed sniffing its own farts.

I read the Foundation trilogy by Isaac Asimov
It's nowhere near as bad I as expected but it's still very fart-sniffingly satisfied with itself. Lots of intellectual pretense and little intellectual payoff. On the plus side it's hilarious how flagrantly Games Workshop plagiarized Foundation for Warhammer 40,000 considering how infamously litigious they are over IP copyrights, I'm amazed Harlan Ellison never snookered them while he was alive.
Overall 6.5/10, 7 if I'm being generous.

>>22925621
saved this from last Christmas

>>21970909
ngl most "classic" SF is genuinely pretty bad

>>21802341
the REAL golden age of sci-fi is the period between about 1910-1940, with the pulps and planetary romances, although those did overlap with what's commonly called the "golden age of SF", which is really the Silver Age, that started with WWII and lasted until Star Wars (and to a lesser extent, Star Trek)